i don't like 3-4

Seer1 · 09-16-2011, 09:09 PM

I do agree that Aaron was amazingly hot that night, but still.... We rushed three a lot and it was real hard for me to watch him pull out his Lazyboy, mix a Bloody Mary and have a smoke before he'd call McCarthy on his cell to see who he should maybe throw it to. And that smile he had on his face? It would've been nice to see one of our linemen wipe it off of him once in a while. 3-4? Naw.

xan · 09-16-2011, 09:48 PM

Alignment of personnel will only make a difference if it anticipates the offensive play, and if the players in that alignment react fasterthsn the offense.

I don't see our defense reacting fast enough in the 4-3 or the 3-4 to make a judgement whether we would do better with one or the other.

Maybe we don't have the second level players to do either, but regardless, you can't NOT pressure the decisionmaker and expect to have success.

I hope we corrected some positioning and responsibility allocations for the Bears. Hen it won't matter much the starting formation.

woody · 09-17-2011, 02:37 AM

I just hope for an early lead. That way, we dictate what the opposing offense has to try to do. Makes them so much more one dimensional.

FinSaint · 09-17-2011, 04:05 AM

And whatever schemes GW uses on the D... and with whatever success... the Saints really need to play well on the special teams, because those plays might very well decide this game in the end.

Hester looked really good at returning punts/kicks with their other players making good blocks and creating lanes for him against the Failclowns and him returning one all the way is one emotional boost that the Bears don't need with them already being pumped up because of Urlacher's situation.

neugey · 09-17-2011, 11:28 AM

We're not well suited for the 3-4. Defensive formations are like sexual positions ... some don't work well for certain people. And some require certain people to do them right.

Danno · 09-17-2011, 11:33 AM

We can't field 3 good LB's, much less 4.

lumm0x · 09-17-2011, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by FinSaint

It's good to have the personnel to run a 3-4 formation when a certain situation requires it, but the Saints simply do not have the LB corps at present to run it as their main base.

I personally prefer 4-3 as a defense to watch, but have I nothing against 3-4 either - whatever works the best and brings the most Ws to the column next to the Saints.

Originally Posted by Danno

We can't field 3 good LB's, much less 4.

These statements reflect the state of our defense. I am all for mixing it up and showing many different defensive looks and alignments. We just don't have a LBer beyond Vilma that can play every down and excel as his role. Vilma is also a better player when covered up by a d-line and he can flow to the ball unblocked.

We'll have to mainly be a 4-3 due to personnel.

Pete · 09-17-2011, 11:59 AM

We got chewed up when GW put the 3-4 to use @ GB.Was this because of A.rodgers?Joe thighsman is saying he's the most accurate QB OF ALL TIME!!!!!Really???Get off his nuts Joe!

Rugby Saint II · 09-17-2011, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by AlaskaSaints

I'm sorry, again, what was that reason we let Fujita get away?

Alaska

Because they didn't want Shanle.

FinSaint · 09-18-2011, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II

Because they didn't want Shanle.

09-16-2011, 09:48 PM	#22
xan Professor Crab and Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Princeton Posts: 3,373 Blog Entries: 34	Alignment of personnel will only make a difference if it anticipates the offensive play, and if the players in that alignment react fasterthsn the offense. I don't see our defense reacting fast enough in the 4-3 or the 3-4 to make a judgement whether we would do better with one or the other. Maybe we don't have the second level players to do either, but regardless, you can't NOT pressure the decisionmaker and expect to have success. I hope we corrected some positioning and responsibility allocations for the Bears. Hen it won't matter much the starting formation.
	Calvin: "I wish I was a Tiger." Hobbes: "Common lament."

09-17-2011, 02:37 AM	#23
woody 100th Post Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 181	I just hope for an early lead. That way, we dictate what the opposing offense has to try to do. Makes them so much more one dimensional. strato likes this.
woody 100th Post Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 181

09-17-2011, 04:05 AM	#24
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,964	And whatever schemes GW uses on the D... and with whatever success... the Saints really need to play well on the special teams, because those plays might very well decide this game in the end. Hester looked really good at returning punts/kicks with their other players making good blocks and creating lanes for him against the Failclowns and him returning one all the way is one emotional boost that the Bears don't need with them already being pumped up because of Urlacher's situation. strato likes this.

09-17-2011, 11:50 AM	#27
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	Originally Posted by FinSaint It's good to have the personnel to run a 3-4 formation when a certain situation requires it, but the Saints simply do not have the LB corps at present to run it as their main base. I personally prefer 4-3 as a defense to watch, but have I nothing against 3-4 either - whatever works the best and brings the most Ws to the column next to the Saints. Originally Posted by Danno We can't field 3 good LB's, much less 4. These statements reflect the state of our defense. I am all for mixing it up and showing many different defensive looks and alignments. We just don't have a LBer beyond Vilma that can play every down and excel as his role. Vilma is also a better player when covered up by a d-line and he can flow to the ball unblocked. We'll have to mainly be a 4-3 due to personnel.

09-17-2011, 04:28 PM	#29
Rugby Saint II Bounty Money $$$ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA. Posts: 24,250	Originally Posted by AlaskaSaints I'm sorry, again, what was that reason we let Fujita get away? Alaska Because they didn't want Shanle.

09-16-2011, 09:09 PM	#21
Seer1 Site Donor Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Bayou Bayfield CO Posts: 4,722	I do agree that Aaron was amazingly hot that night, but still.... We rushed three a lot and it was real hard for me to watch him pull out his Lazyboy, mix a Bloody Mary and have a smoke before he'd call McCarthy on his cell to see who he should maybe throw it to. And that smile he had on his face? It would've been nice to see one of our linemen wipe it off of him once in a while. 3-4? Naw.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

09-17-2011, 11:28 AM	#25
neugey Hu Dat! Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,885 Blog Entries: 13	We're not well suited for the 3-4. Defensive formations are like sexual positions ... some don't work well for certain people. And some require certain people to do them right.

09-17-2011, 11:33 AM	#26
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,761	We can't field 3 good LB's, much less 4.

09-17-2011, 11:59 AM	#28
Pete • Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Patterson, LA Posts: 1,757	We got chewed up when GW put the 3-4 to use @ GB.Was this because of A.rodgers?Joe thighsman is saying he's the most accurate QB OF ALL TIME!!!!!Really???Get off his nuts Joe!

09-18-2011, 01:36 AM	#30
FinSaint Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Finland... formerly Southern Virginia Posts: 4,964	Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II Because they didn't want Shanle.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/36419-i-dont-like-3-4-a.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
i don't like 3-4	This thread	Refback	09-16-2011 08:08 AM	4