i don't like 3-4
 

I may be wrong on this so please feel free to point out any errors I may have made but I really don't think we have the personnel for a 3-4 alignment. The reason I think this is, as much as I like Vilma his ability to operate in this formation is restricted because of his weight as he is relatively light compared to other MLBs. Therefore if he isn't free to do what he does best he has to spend a lot of time trying to shed blockers. Shaun Rogers has to be a more dominant force in the middle and he hasn't shown me that. I would much prefer a 4-3 with him and Ellis or him and Franklin but I also thought he took a few plays off and wasn't on the field as much as I would have wanted. Was he really fed up at Cleveland, which meant his heart wasn't in it, or is he actually a lazy player? He is now with one of the best organizations in football and that alone should be enough for him to do his utmost to try and get us to the playoffs.

I think the 3-4 is something we can use in certain situations or against certain teams. GWs defence is a multi fron defence so it will be in the mix while at the same time not being the base-defence.

I don't like it either. We have enough trouble getting a pass rush with 4 d-linemen.

Ellis..Rogers and Franklin....with Wilson and Casillas coming of the edge and Vilma ..Dunbar in the middle ..has to have some success ..you would think..

I like the 4 up front myself leaving the LB's more able to get to the ball. Looking at the stats from last week, it "seems" we are heading for another dinged up secondary with all of the run support they had to supply. Our front 4 has got to do a better job getting to the ball carrier. Leading tacklers were the secondary with Vilma (of course) and Shanle. Front 4 were bottom dwellers. How do you play a whole game and only have 1 tackle and no assist? Smith should help but that won't be this week. 3/4 is just a twist to help confuse blocking schemes and to disguise blitz cover packages, and that's a good thing. Our base 4/3 needs to get more solid up front so that 34 points becomes enough to beat anybody.

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.

I believe the 3-4 (as a base D) can work well against the run because the 3 D-linemen are heavier in the 3-4 than in the 4-3; and could occupy more blockers. And the 4 LBs are on the "second level", meaning they are not immediately accessible for O-linemen to block. The O-linemen have to get past the D-line before engaging LBs.

And, I agree we do not have enough good LBs to run a base 3-4 D.

I think we shuffled d-linemen in and out frequently because of conditioning concerns due to the lock out. I like Mitch King, but he saw way too much playing time for my liking. Considering the three guys in front of him on the depth chart.

Rogers, Franklin, and Ellis should see more and more action as we go through the season.

I love the 3-4. We just don't have the rush linebackers to run it.

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

Alaska

Money.

Sorry to be negative, but against the packers we could have played 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 9-2(lol).....it wouldn't have mattered. Not having W Smith is hurting us worse than a lot of people think.

I agree. What I noticed against the Packers, is that they used the backup D-Line in that formation instead of the starters. Which could have been an extra way to try and keep everyone fresh. Overall, it didn't work. My personal opinion is that they need to find a way to get Dunbar and Vilma on the field at the same time in running situations. Dunbar seems to be the 2nd best LB on the team right now and he didn't see many snaps.

Mediocre player + mega contract = See Ya'

Bout like Harper:mad:

If they would just f--ken tackle it wouldn't matter what they ran!!

I'd love to have a 3-4 - with the right personnel...

Except Loomis/Payton/Williams (and coaches players and fans who vote for pro-bowlers) saw it differently, but other than those facts, I guess so.

Its not the alignment, its the alignees.

We all know the probowl is overrated...;) ..With his bum ankle...
might best he sits this one out...he is slow enough this could spell disaster..Should have got Sharper in this week , and cut some of the dead weight thats just sucking up paychecks and using our facility's.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

Because they didn't want Shanle.:doh:

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile...3_854059_n.jpg