Defensive shakeup
 

Ok hear me out maybe im crazy...but there has to be a way to improve this D line..ok...what if went to a primary 3-4?...i know Vilma loves the 4-3..but were going to say shut up and play where we put you..


Ok...here is how i might would run the front 7.. ok now im not a genius at D ..just looking at our personnel and how we might get more pressure and contain the perimeters better...

D-line..

Jordan at DE
Rogers at DT with Ellis..Johnson and Franklin rotating
Smith at DE

of course we have Charleston.... McBride and Galette to rotate at DE


LBs



Wilson at OLB

Vilma at MLB

Dunbar at MLB

Casillas...atOLB

with Shanle and Humber..Bussey as backups..also maybe Galette in the OLB spot..on run plays

Harper would be able to roam and help in run support and also get help with coverage.. still send him on blitzes..

Any thoughts?...i know its crazy..and really if our front 4 would just step up and help keep the LBs clean that would be a huge plus..None of this really matters if we don't tackle better..

Aww the days of the Dome Patrol..

As ineffective as the front four have been, I like it. Maybe it helps contain the big runs we have been subject to.

We can't field 3 good LB's so I'm pretty sure 4 ain't no better.

Casillas has been showing promise.

I have mixed emotions.
On the one hand, masking, stunting, and coverage could be improved.
The 4 linebackers could do some hands down duty, especially if Junior is in there.
Our abilities on the outside edges would be two steps improved (2 steps is a lot).
We need to do something different to shake things up a bit.
On the other hand, the one thing I don't like about the 3-4 is, it gives O-lines direct engagement on the LB's.
It simply increases the territory the nose tackle and DE's have to hold down.
We have not been cloggin up the middle with 2 guys in there, I'm almost scared of pulling 1 guy to the 2nd level.
Harper may end up with 15 tackles and a bruised collar bone.
A good mix of the 3-4 4-3 could give us some advantage in confusing blocking schemes.
If it helps us make plays, force some punts, gets some turnovers, I'm all for it.

4-3

DL -Jordan, Franklin, Ellis, Smith
LB -Casilla, Dunbar, lesser of all the evils

How that's for a shakeup? Bench Vilma and Rogers... see if that gets their blood boiling and swag back.

Ok swap Franklin for Rogers...but keep Vilma in there ..just get him some help...i think he might be gimpy and its starting to show..

You make some good points and thats why i started this thread..if you notice our LBs are always tackling down the field ..maybe this way they would be able to stop those runs to the outside and cutbacks before they gain 9 yards..or more..but it all starts with sound tackling...or at least stand the guy up and wait for help..

We really don't run a 4-3 really...

Ok the one thing I like in your plan is Gallete at OLB. I think that has some promise to it. He seems to have speed and can play. Mix him up blitzing. Technically it would be like 2 DE's blitzing on one side.

We run a base 4-3...and yes Galette might help ala D Ware does in Dallas...and he might be better against the run with his size and speed in the OLB spot..

I've always been in favor of the 4-3 as opposed to the 3-4 as the base for a D, but I wouldn't be against it if it made the D better. But, alas, it's hard to see how things would improve with the LBs the Saints have at the moment, and I'm not sure how well GW is adapted to working out of that base... does anyone know if he has ever had a 3-4 as the base of his D?

Anyway, if they were to run the 3-4 I'd like to see Franklin as the nose, because that is where he shined in SF.

Myself; I'm a fan of the 3-4... i think it's a lot easier to disguise blitzes and bring pressure from a lot more angles. However at this time our LBs are too small to run it consistently.

Me to Mitch...if you notice the 3-4 gives us the most trouble..and the teams that run it are always the best Ds in the league.

Ok Mitch i got it..lol


Wilson -OLB 250
Vilma-MLB 230
Shanle MLB 245
Galette-OLB 253

That's 3-4 size...

Regarding the tackles, Franklin and Rogers rotate at the nose as they're the same position and big guys like that have a snap-count ceiling...

Johnson and Ellis are at the Three-tech; Ellis second on the depth chart to send a msg...

Rotate the DE's more so their fresh and can keep coming all game through with the best rushers game by game basis going in the fourth quarter...

Linebackers? Vilma/Humber (Mike-backer), Shanle/Casillas (Will-backer), Dunbar/Wilson (Sam-backer); they need work, lotsa work...

Yep, nothing wrong with a 4-3.

Its not the alignment that matters, its the alignees.

Our current players are better suited using a base 4-3.

While Jordan, Franklin, and Wilson are decent 3-4 prospects, Smith is strictly a 4-3 DE.

Vilma is strictly a 4-3 MLB (or a 4-3 WLB), Dunbar is ideally a 4-3 MLB, and Shanle can't play ILB in a 3-4. They'd all get eaten alive by O-linemen.

I'm not sure Galette would be a good stand-up DE/OLB either. He looks like a 4-3 RDE all day long.

Johnson and Ellis are in no way shape or form 3-4 DT's.

I don't think the scheme is the problem, its more execution .... it would help if the corners would catch INTs that hit them right in the hands

I'd move Vilma to WLB, Wilson to the middle he's heavier than Vilma. I really like Vilma but for some reason he seems a half step slower to the ball, he could easily cover ground from that position. Wilson is fast but not as seasoned which could may make up in speed for inexperience.

Actually 3-4 LB's are usually 4-3 tweeners; 4-3 Defensive ends that are really too small to play the position effectively... I would say 250-260+

Rogers. Underachiever before he came here. Still one.
Franklin. What has he done?
Ellis. IMO, he's suffering from playing next to Rogers
Jordan. Rookie
Tom Johnson. Raw.
Gallette. Undersized. Not a polished rusher.
Charleston. Career backup.
Smith. Best we've got?
Dunbar. Physical, doesn't play smart.
Casillas. Work in progress.
Shanle. Shanle.
Vilma. Commander in chief. But can't rely on his cabinet.


Challenge me if you like, but I don't believe this is a unit that plays well together.

The real field general was Sharper, Vilma is good but I think DS had that extra ability to keep the seems glued a little tighter. Just my opinion though.

I think you nailed all their negatives pretty well. But they all have some positives too.

Franklin has played well the last few games
Galette is unpolished but looks to have all the tools to be a good NFL RDE
Ellis has his moments, will play better as a true 3-tech
Jordan has developed much faster than I thought and looks to have a bright future
Johnson looks like a great #2 3-tech in a 4 man rotation
Casillas is playing too fast, which can be corrected with more coaching
Martez is raw, but has more star potential than any player on this team

There are some bright spots there, just not enough yet.

It also might help if the CB's were not playing off the receiver 10-15 yds!

Agreed, what has Brandon Lloyd done that deserves a 10 yard cushion? Reminds me of the Packers game.... why is GW bringing back the sins of Gary Gibbs? This team actually has corners now let them play some bump and run

Agree about Sharper, without him this defense has lost its swagger, seems that the defense lost heart too

I wasn't feeling positive...

Thanks, Sunshine. :cool:

Interesting..

New Orleans – Three Performances of Note

Vulnerability at middle linebacker

At some point a consistent vulnerability, such as that which the Saints have at middle linebacker with Jonathan Vilma (-3.7 run defense), has to be exposed. This Sunday was that day. This marked the ninth straight game in which Vilma has graded negatively as a run defender and though he managed not to miss a tackle for the third straight week he is a clear Achilles heel for this defense. The improved play of the likes of Sedrick Ellis has masked his poor form so far this season, but with the Saints’ defensive line failing to make a consistent impact in run defense Vilma’s poor angles and inability to shed blocks was brought in to sharp focus. Vilma’s touchdown may be his headline play from this game but dig a little deeper and you find a very poor performance. Vilma was neutralized effectively four times at the second level, with no play exhibiting his struggles in diagnosing plays better than at 3:59 of Q1 when he took off after a fullback in the right flat on a pass route rather than staying home and defending a run that was cut into the area he vacated in the defense. Poor show.



Return to NFC West brings a return to form

When the New Orleans Saints signed Aubrayo Franklin (+2.4) they thought they’d be getting the stout run defender who became one of the premier nose tackles in the NFL over the past few seasons in San Francisco. Up to this week his returns on their investment had been somewhat inconsistent and he has been overshadowed by Shaun Rogers and Sedrick Ellis. This week, against a familiar NFC West opponent, he came to the fore and showed the form the Saints expect from him registering two defensive stops in 14 snaps in run defense. Only Franklin’s limited snaps prevented him having more of an impact on the Rams’ running game.



Run blocking worries

Two seasons ago the Saints’ had one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL. Last season things started to fall away into inconsistency, and that steady decline continued this season and into this week 8 loss to the Rams. Four of the Saints’ starters graded negatively with their run blocking this week and of particular concern must be the performance of Carl Nicks (-3.1 run blocking this week). When the Saints were at their best they thrived on balance in their offense with the running game just as dangerous as the passing game. If they are to return to their best the Saints’ offensive line must return to form to allow the Saints to run the ball more than the 20 carries they managed this week.



Re-Focused: Saints @ Rams, Week 8 | ProFootballFocus.com

We don't have linemen that can win an unassisted battle, and no linebacker has the speed or skill to integrate into a complex coverage scheme. An none of them could fake an orgasm, much less disguise a coverage.

So, upshot here, not going to get an effective 3-4 this season. Maybe if we get 4-5 different players with more skills...

I agree that the corners actually need to cover, not be somewhere in the same area code at the snap.

I have to disagree with the speed at LB...we have plenty enough speed at the position...they just aren't the starters...and as was stated Franklin shined in the 3-4 in San Fran..Rogers should at 350...he should command double teams like he did at Texas...

All im saying... and you can all agree to disagree is that we need to try and shake things up with some of our personnel..

Whether we have the right guys are not..it cant be worse...does that satisfy the G.W haters ..the our D sux crowd?.. I want G.W to think like that to..always looks for an edge...

I dont hate GW strato, so you know. I want him to stay, but I think sometimes he's to smart for his own good. He plays with personal to much, last year we were ranked 7th this year 25th. so we do kind of suck,lol.

I just want last years defense back. I want him to back peddle, and say, " OH, ok that didn't work".

I think he sticks with the personnel too much...thats the problem...He has ran a 4-3 throughout his coaching career....with some 3-4 alignments thrown in..this thread was really a hypothetical one anyway...

just to see if others thought a 3-4 might create an ability to stop the run better..by containing with 4 LBs instead of three..and a chance to get Shanle off the field...

hmm you could be right. I had no idea Vilma was playing so poorly

I think J.V could be still nursing that knee....he is a tough cookie and will play though pain...just wis he was 20 pounds heavier and still had speed.

yeah, I think a couple brilliant LB's could make all the difference, much like it has in GB
Good site to read if you get bored
Smartfootball.com
should be required reading by any good football fan. I doubt many here has read this
http://smartfootball.com/gameplannin...ooks#more-2555

I found this interesting...this is kinda what Vilma and Harper have been most of the season...


and quote

"13:42): Poor leverage by both Vilma and Harper allowed Jackson to turn the corner and pick up 10 yards on a run that should have been a loss. Vilma diagnosed the play immediately and was unblocked, but inexplicably hesitated in the hole, allowing Jackson the split-second he needed to break the play outside. Harper surrendered his edge responsibility and Jackson easily beat him to the corner. This play might not have seemed like much at the time but better execution by two of the Saints' best defenders would have resulted in another tackle for loss or at worst a minimal gain. Instead of, say, third-and-20 or third-and-15 from the shadow of their own end zone, the Rams instead had a manageable third-and-9, which they converted en route to the first scoring drive of the game. To me, this was the first turning point of the game.

Another good observation

(1:36): The Saints talk about "populating to the football" all the time when asked about creating more turnovers. This 13-yard catch by Salas was a case study. A solid hit by Vilma forced the ball loose but because Robinson wasn't hustling to the ball he was beaten to it by Jackson at the 3. Another example of the Rams' simply playing harder and with more intensity than the Saints.

I could go on and on..form that article...i posted it under this

New Orleans Saints don't show much fire in loss to St. Louis Rams: Film study - New Orleans Saints Football NFL News - NOLA.com

Yeah and vilma was effectively taken out of the play a number of times by blocking. You really think he's that hurt? and GW has no replacement for him. very interesting stuff

I think Dunbar has filled in decent enough for Vilma, when he has too

I agree with you, wonder why we don't use him

Exactly. Sean Payton is our resident mad doctor - there can be only one.

It's defense, stupid: Knock the **** out of the guy with the ball and ***, ****, or bleed it will come loose.

Know your role, do it well - or will find someone who can.:doh: