SaintGup

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.

Crusader

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.

Danno

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

strato

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..

darstep

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.

**SaintSince67**

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.

the-commish

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.

jcp026

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.

papz

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

AlaskaSaints

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

Alaska