Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

Personal preference... I like the front D-line line-up more in the base 4-3, it's just more logical and ordered to me than the 3-4 line-up.

Also, I like the responsibilities of the LBs in the 4-3 more than in the 3-4 where the line gets rather blurred between OLBs and DEs.

Both can definitely work well in the NFL regardless of what conference or division a team plays in, but you must have the right personnel to run either one - not sure if the Saints have the personnel to ran either one successfully, but they're certainly closer with the base 4-3.

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

I am a fan of the 5-2.. always have been but you never see it used. All I know is going to a 3-4 or 5-2 is better than being the worst D in the league.

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

Agreed, they can get as much pressure with three as they are now with four. Let's move toward damage control.

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

I say, stick with Spags' scheme, because that'll lead to success eventually. It might seem like a lost cause right now, but I certainly wouldn't just throw away all the work they've done in the offseason and leading up to this point for the sake of just doing something different in hopes of it working out.

Also, I don't think the Saints have the personnel to run a 3-4 successfully at the moment. So it would be better to continue with this base 4-3 and give bigger roles and more playing time to those players that Spags and the FO see as worth keeping around after this season, so that they'll keep learning the system and be better prepared for next season while hopefully improving as this season goes on.

Then bring in better players during the offseason via the draft and the free agency to complement the existing roster - players that fit Spags' scheme.

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

Why did we get rid of Jo-lonn Dunbar?

I used to think he was a really good player for us!

Sorry if this has been asked already on the forum somewhere and I missed it!

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

Well, there hasn't been any official announcement about it - which there never really is - but I'd venture a guess that after Spags was done with the player evaluations, Dunbar didn't fit into his scheme.

Also, they were bringing in two MLBs in Lofton and Hawthorne (MLB is his natural position), so they probably thought that they didn't need another Mike.

IMO, Dunbar wasn't as good of a player as many here seem to think, and I wasn't at all upset when they decided not to re-sign him - I've said as much before on this topic.

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

The 5-2 is basically the Bears 46 Defense...

They had an abundance of effective pass rushers that could be in the opposition's backfield in less than three seconds...

Re: OLB's - A sad day
 

That figures.

We sign a couple good players and they all get hurt (though Lofton is at least able to play through his injury). Then the would be backups are either suspended or changed positions. I was high on Wilson as a speed rushing OLB, but they move him to end, which I thought could work out, however he has barely been on the field. I get that they are both raw, but Wilson and Gallette need to be on the field, getting after the QB. What could we possibly have to lose by putting in some guys who can actually get up the field?