Originally Posted by BleedingRed (Post 14064907)

I just don't think we have the DT's for a 4-3, and we sure as shit do not have the Lber's for a 4-3..........

4-3 Line Backers have to be hella fast, not to mention this would mean Ford is gone because he is not a DE.

Originally Posted by BleedingRed (Post 14064907)

I just don't think we have the DT's for a 4-3, and we sure as shit do not have the Lber's for a 4-3..........

4-3 Line Backers have to be hella fast, not to mention this would mean Ford is gone because he is not a DE.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 14064885)

Because we have some very real problems with how we disguise/mix up our coverage looks.

That problem is that we....don't. Ever.

I still laugh at the "Bob's complicated scheme" narrative because there was absolutely nothing complicated about it and it took Tony Romo barking out what we were doing before every play before folks went "hey, wait a minute...."

Sutton's schemes lacked any sort of wrinkle to them. And yet somehow that bumble**** Scandrick still didn't know where to stand but I digress.

If we can get someone in here who does with our coverages what Reid is able to do with route combinations, etc... we would be goddamn unbeatable. Now defense isn't as open to tinkering so that's not going to work quite as well, but even a little bit of advancement there could be huge.

Besides, I think Houston will be excellent with his hand on the ground and frankly the only way to extract any value at all from Speaks or K-pass is to put them in-line as well.

A 4-3 transition should absolutely be considered and frankly I would prefer it. Then again, I don't know that Richard is likely to be married to ANY sort of alignment on his front; he's a coverage guru first who is likely to simply fit his fronts to his talent.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 14064885)

Because we have some very real problems with how we disguise/mix up our coverage looks.

That problem is that we....don't. Ever.

I still laugh at the "Bob's complicated scheme" narrative because there was absolutely nothing complicated about it and it took Tony Romo barking out what we were doing before every play before folks went "hey, wait a minute...."

Sutton's schemes lacked any sort of wrinkle to them. And yet somehow that bumble**** Scandrick still didn't know where to stand but I digress.

If we can get someone in here who does with our coverages what Reid is able to do with route combinations, etc... we would be goddamn unbeatable. Now defense isn't as open to tinkering so that's not going to work quite as well, but even a little bit of advancement there could be huge.

Besides, I think Houston will be excellent with his hand on the ground and frankly the only way to extract any value at all from Speaks or K-pass is to put them in-line as well.

A 4-3 transition should absolutely be considered and frankly I would prefer it. Then again, I don't know that Richard is likely to be married to ANY sort of alignment on his front; he's a coverage guru first who is likely to simply fit his fronts to his talent.

Originally Posted by The Pest (Post 14064915)

The **** are you talking about?

You put a combo of KPass and Speaks on one side and Houston on the other side with Jones and Nnadi in the middle.

Hitchens and DOD can play LB in a 4-3 scheme.

Originally Posted by Best22 (Post 14064936)

I have heard of certain coaches having complex schemes that are also easy for the quarterback to decipher. Complicated responsibilities for the players but smart quarterbacks can figure it out.

Sometimes teams defenses appear simple on TV but then after the DC gets fired we learn the scheme was too “complex.”

Not always like this and I don’t have any concrete examples right now but I’ve seen heard this before

Originally Posted by Best22 (Post 14064936)

I have heard of certain coaches having complex schemes that are also easy for the quarterback to decipher. Complicated responsibilities for the players but smart quarterbacks can figure it out.

Sometimes teams defenses appear simple on TV but then after the DC gets fired we learn the scheme was too “complex.”

Not always like this and I don’t have any concrete examples right now but I’ve seen heard this before

Originally Posted by BleedingRed (Post 14064942)

Ok,

lets just assume we did exactly what you said.

KPass and Speaks, ok... Maybe DE is their natural position, but neither of them have speed. Houston moving from standing up to hand in the dirt MIGHT work.

Jones great! Nnadi not sure of, but let assume you can fix this by signing David Irving (sketchy at best)

Now you are going to put Hitchens and DoD in space, which one exactly is going to attack the LoS?


Making moves like this isn't just so simple.........

Originally Posted by BleedingRed (Post 14064942)

Ok,

lets just assume we did exactly what you said.

KPass and Speaks, ok... Maybe DE is their natural position, but neither of them have speed. Houston moving from standing up to hand in the dirt MIGHT work.

Jones great! Nnadi not sure of, but let assume you can fix this by signing David Irving (sketchy at best)

Now you are going to put Hitchens and DoD in space, which one exactly is going to attack the LoS?


Making moves like this isn't just so simple.........

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 14064885)

Because we have some very real problems with how we disguise/mix up our coverage looks.

That problem is that we....don't. Ever.

I still laugh at the "Bob's complicated scheme" narrative because there was absolutely nothing complicated about it and it took Tony Romo barking out what we were doing before every play before folks went "hey, wait a minute...."

Sutton's schemes lacked any sort of wrinkle to them. And yet somehow that bumble**** Scandrick still didn't know where to stand but I digress.

If we can get someone in here who does with our coverages what Reid is able to do with route combinations, etc... we would be goddamn unbeatable. Now defense isn't as open to tinkering so that's not going to work quite as well, but even a little bit of advancement there could be huge.

Besides, I think Houston will be excellent with his hand on the ground and frankly the only way to extract any value at all from Speaks or K-pass is to put them in-line as well.

A 4-3 transition should absolutely be considered and frankly I would prefer it. Then again, I don't know that Richard is likely to be married to ANY sort of alignment on his front; he's a coverage guru first who is likely to simply fit his fronts to his talent.

Originally Posted by mac459 (Post 14064962)

I know little about football, so I could be extremely wrong on this. Isn't DE in a 4-3 just used to set the edges and your pass rush comes from the DT. If that is true Speaks and Kpass don't need speed. I mean I am sure they have more responsibility than just setting the edges but I thought that was the main responsibility

If I am wrong I will just go ahead and **** off.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 14064960)

I will reiterate that folks spent 4 years calling out Bob's schemes as too vanilla until the moment Parker said it was complicated and Petro started preaching it like the gospel.

That narrative NEVER existed until Ron Parker showed up and tried to defend his existence on the team when he knew his athleticism damn sure wouldn't do it for him.

I mean c'mon - did you see anything in that game that was hard to decipher? Read safety, kill play, rinse/repeat. It was fish in a barrel and it didn't take Tom Brady to prove it. Sutton may be rigid and he may be antiquated or too relaxed. There are a dozen reasons or more to criticize the job performance of Bob Sutton but 'complicated scheme' just ain't one of them from anything I ever saw from this squad.