View Single Post
Old 11-15-2012, 10:13 AM   #54
Aspengc8 Aspengc8 is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Dec 2005
Casino cash: $9950632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayze View Post
I can agree with that.

One reason I don't like it is it seems like you need more playmakers than in the 4-3.
I mean, a huge NT (which, there just aren'[t too many humans alive that fit the bill); a incredibly smart MLB. (though it could be argued you need that regardless); and I think big OLBs that can take on the run AND drop into coverage. Hard to find both traits IMO.

our current "3-4" sucks balls.
Having a dominant NT, and OLB's that can get to the QB, will anchor a good 3-4. You can always find 'tweener' 4-3 DT's/DE's that can convert to 3-4. Also your ILB's need to be able to shed a block if lineman get to their level. Thank god DJ takes good angles.. him nor belcher shed very well. The other big problem is if we want to bring Houstin & Hali, then belcher is in coverage. Dude is bad in coverage. I really think Powe & Poe need to be on the field when we are in any 3-4 alignment. I'd put smith out there over tjack or any of those other clowns.
Posts: 2,816
Aspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby PiscitelliAspengc8 's adopt a chief was Sabby Piscitelli
    Reply With Quote