PDA

View Full Version : Switch to 3-4 Defense; Led by Mike Singletary?



MulletMullitia
12-16-2011, 01:22 PM
Vikings defenders regularly ignored play calls | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/16/vikings-defenders-regularly-ignored-play-calls/)


Early this season, members of the Vikings secondary wasn’t too confident in the approach that defensive coordinator Fred Pagac was taking with his coverage calls.

So they ignored him.

Tom Pelissero of espn1500.com writes that a group of players simply refused to play the defenses called, yelling out their own coverages as they broke the huddle. The players didn’t like the frequency and timing of some man coverage and blitz concept calls.


Changes are coming to the Vikings defense in the offseason. We’re starting to get a clearer picture of what those changes might entail. Pelissero writes there have been discussions about transitioning to a 3-4 defense with Mike Singletary getting promoted to defensive coordinator. There’s a catch:

“There also are strong concerns within the building about Singletary’s aptitude for the position,” Pelissero writes.

It’s also unclear whether Leslie Frazier, who comes from a a Tampa-2 background, would be open to the change.

vikinggreg
12-16-2011, 02:23 PM
Geez Frazier is looking like the defensive guru as the HC similiar to the offensive guru Childress when he was the HC, guess what we need to have happen is get the Brett Favre of middle linebackers (or maybe a safety) on the field to run the defense

Freakout
12-16-2011, 02:43 PM
Uh so you dump the DC? How about getting rid of the awful DB's that won't listen to their coach.

I would like more information. It has been said that Pagac wanted more man coverage so he can blitz more so is it our DB's not wanting to play that style? If so again that is the players fault.

This is why the roster needs overhauled.

Freakout
12-16-2011, 02:45 PM
Geez Frazier is looking like the defensive guru as the HC similiar to the offensive guru Childress when he was the HC, guess what we need to have happen is get the Brett Favre of middle linebackers (or maybe a safety) on the field to run the defense

Except we have seen good defenses with Fraizer coaching them.

vikinggreg
12-16-2011, 03:14 PM
Except we have seen good defenses with Fraizer coaching them.

There have been good defenses against the run game but issues with the passing game.....similar to Childress's offense, good rushing numbers but passing issues

C Mac D
12-16-2011, 03:14 PM
If we switch to a 3-4, we're done... and I'm done with Leslie Frazier. I don't blame the DBs for ignoring the coaches calls. They clearly don't know what they're doing.

C Mac D
12-16-2011, 03:26 PM
Except we have seen good defenses with Fraizer coaching them.

Good... not great... too many Vikings fans are willing to settle for mediocrity.

I guess it's too much to ask for a great team.

i_bleed_purple
12-16-2011, 04:20 PM
If we switch to a 3-4, we're done... and I'm done with Leslie Frazier. I don't blame the DBs for ignoring the coaches calls. They clearly don't know what they're doing.

Very true. we are not ready for the 3-4, and our depth is even worse.

The best possible scenario IMO for the 3-4 now is:



Allen EJ Greenway Draftee/FA

...........KW........????..........Ballard

Robison is Allens' backup, EJ is poorly suited as a 3-4 LB, Brinkley even more so. Erin would be a backup SLB most likely. Onatolu might be able to rotate in as well.

KW isn't really the ideal NT, he'd be a decent DE, Ballard on the other side, Need to figure out the NT situation, and get another starter.

Now, this is assuming Allen can make the transition (See: Aaron Kampman), EJ doesn't continue to decline, Greenway can handle ILB and we get another decent LB.

Freakout
12-16-2011, 04:32 PM
There have been good defenses against the run game but issues with the passing game.....similar to Childress's offense, good rushing numbers but passing issues

You will give up passing yards as a cover 2 defense. That is expected. It is a bend but don't break defense. Which is why if you look at the stats we were a very good red zone defense despite the total passing yards teams averaged against us.

i_bleed_purple
12-16-2011, 04:44 PM
You will give up passing yards as a cover 2 defense. That is expected. It is a bend but don't break defense. Which is why if you look at the stats we were a very good red zone defense despite the total passing yards teams averaged against us.

What about our defense is "Very good"? We aren't very good in points, we aren't very good in forcing 3 and outs, or stopping on 3rd down. Never have been. What are we good at?

vikinggreg
12-16-2011, 05:22 PM
You will give up passing yards as a cover 2 defense. That is expected. It is a bend but don't break defense. Which is why if you look at the stats we were a very good red zone defense despite the total passing yards teams averaged against us.

Yeah I can remember the Monday night game when the Pats kick us with out running the ball once just dink and dunk all night or the Steelers coming into the dome and trailing in the 4th quarter and 3-4 straight places to the tightend (Health Miller) and winning. It does bend, there are zonebeater routes, most teams know them and the good teams execute them.

jargomcfargo
12-16-2011, 06:40 PM
I hate the cover two defense. It depends on pressure from the front 4 and is vulnerable if we have to blitz. We don't always get pressure from the front four.
It also depends on a middle linebacker that has great range and speed to cover the middle of the field. We don't have that.
It also depends on safeties that can tackle. We don't have that.

I'm ok with a scheme change but not with Singeltary coaching it.

After reading this article, Pelissero: Dysfunction on defense has Vikings ripe for major changes | 1500 ESPN Twin Cities ? Minnesota Sports News & Opinion (Twins, Vikings, Wolves, Wild, Gophers) (http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Pelissero_Dysfunction_on_defense_has_Vikings_ripe_for_major_changes121511?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+1500espn%2Fsportswire%2Fvikings+%281500+ESPN+SportsWire+-+Minnesota+Vikings%29), I think it's time to get a GM and send the coaching staff and a number of players packing.
Wipe the slate clean, including Frazier.

Purple Floyd
12-16-2011, 09:39 PM
If this article is true then I have made my decision that Frazier and the entire FO need to go.

If any player actually refused to do what they were told and changed a formation prior to the snap and that player was not immediately yanked and cut the next day then the head coach will never be able to control the team.

If the defensive leaders like Greenway, Allen, Winfield actually allowed this to happen without putting the players in their place then they are also responsible and should be dealt with.

This whole article seems to be way too implausible to have actually happened so I hope it turns out to be wrong. If it is true then we are witnessing the beginning of a very dark era in team history.

12purplepride28
12-17-2011, 12:24 AM
If we switch to a 3-4, we're done... and I'm done with Leslie Frazier. I don't blame the DBs for ignoring the coaches calls. They clearly don't know what they're doing.

Because it's working out so well for them to ignore the coaches. Our DBs our clueless.

Purple Floyd
12-17-2011, 06:56 AM
There would be no better time to make the switch than when our team has hit rock bottom and when we have a large number of FA's and guys that need to be replaced.

When I look at the roster on defense there is only one guy who is untouchable and that is JA. After that Greenway is our next best player but as far as OLB's are concerned he is barely a top 10. The entire secondary needs to go.

It is obvious that we have a division that is dominated by QB's and we cannot have a defense that is as soft as ours has been for a long time and be able to compete.

So if there was ever a time to transition to a more effective defense then now is absolutely that time.

thorshammer
12-18-2011, 09:23 AM
I don't like the idea. Taking JA out of what he does best just doesn't seem right. Also some other teams are switching back and dropping the 3-4. It looks like they are seriously looking at the switch.
Packers apt to replace OLB Walden in 2012 - NFL - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=pfw-20111217_packers_apt_to_replace_olb_walden_in_2012)

Purple Floyd
12-18-2011, 09:49 AM
Here is an interesting paragraph or 2

Some Clarification is in Order: The Defense and NFL Trends - Mile High Report (http://www.milehighreport.com/2011/7/11/2238807/some-clarification-is-in-order-defense-nfl-trends)



Now it has been discussed that the 4-3 defense is superior to the 3-4 against mobile quarterbacks for a number of reasons, including a pass rush that comes more up the middle and presents better coverage on the sides to stop a rolling out quarterback, as well as stopping the quarterback from stepping up and out of the pocket by making him face two defensive tackles. But the moment Peyton Manning entered the league, the NFL did an abrupt face, and the addition of guys like Manning, Brees and other pocket passers saw the rise of the 3-4 again, very rapidly. Manning's distaste for the 3-4 is well known, and for a guy who puts in as much work as he does, and to still have issues with a defense is a sign.


269

i_bleed_purple
12-18-2011, 10:29 AM
I hate the cover two defense. It depends on pressure from the front 4 and is vulnerable if we have to blitz. We don't always get pressure from the front four.
It also depends on a middle linebacker that has great range and speed to cover the middle of the field. We don't have that.
It also depends on safeties that can tackle. We don't have that.

I'm ok with a scheme change but not with Singeltary coaching it.

Singletary isn't our coordinator

jargomcfargo
12-18-2011, 11:12 AM
Singletary isn't our coordinator
The article proposed Singletary being promoted to coordinator to run the 3-4.
"Singletary isn't our coordinator", DUH !

kevoncox
12-18-2011, 12:05 PM
I'm not sure why so many seem to hate the scheme. There was a time when the Pack changing to the 3-4 was unheard of. They ended up losing their DE in the switch but since then, they have had a dominating defense (I include this season because their offense is simply outscoring everyone and giving amble opportunity for yards to be put on their defense.)

This will work because...
1. Allen can play the OLB like Ware plays it. Rush 85% of the time and play the flat zone the rest.
2. Brinkley is a good LB and he is sitting on the bench.
3. Erin is average and should not be starting, he will be moved to the bench.
4. Griffen will be moved to OLB like we wanted to.
5. We have a bunch of DTs that are too small to play DTs and Too big to play DE.

Purple Floyd
12-18-2011, 12:22 PM
I am so ready for the 3-4. If the team continues with this pathetic version of the T2 I will have no desire to even watch .

Purple Floyd
12-18-2011, 12:25 PM
They just had a stat about the Vikings defense over the past 8 games:

72% completion percentage allowed
20 TD's allowed
0 INT's.
128.6 Passer rating allowed.

We need to draft for the secondary far more than the OL. What a mess.

Braddock
12-18-2011, 01:43 PM
They just had a stat about the Vikings defense over the past 8 games:

72% completion percentage allowed
20 TD's allowed
0 INT's.
128.6 Passer rating allowed.

We need to draft for the secondary far more than the OL. What a mess.

I would love to draft secondary with our first pick, than the rest of the draft pick OL. I mean, the Saints aren't even blitzing and Ponder has NO time. We cannot hope to win with having a OL this bad? The #3 pick should be spent on a stud secondary pick, but OL is our biggest concern. I don't mind giving up points, but we need to be able to score them too.

BBQ Platypus
12-18-2011, 02:38 PM
I don't see why so many people think this is a wonderful idea. Switching to the 3-4 won't fix our complete lack of talent on the back end, and will shift the focus of our defense to our second-weakest position (linebackers).

If you're going to do it, you'll have to trade Allen before his trade value plummets. He isn't fast enough to be a 3-4 OLB. His sacks come from leverage and technique - he's not a speed rusher. He'll be closer to Aaron Kampman than DeMarcus Ware. This means we'll have zero playmakers on defense and our secondary will still suck. We have to rebuild the defense from the ground up regardless of whether we stick with the 4-3 or not. It's not the Tampa 2 that's the problem here (and even if it were, there are other things you can run out of the 4-3).

I just don't get it.

Purple Floyd
12-18-2011, 03:03 PM
The problem is that even if we improve the secondary and the NT teams like the Bears, Packers, Lions, Pats, Saints etc are always going to carve up the T2 because they exploit the soft zone coverages. The only way we are going to be able to stop these teams is to upgrade the secondary with DB's that can play man defense and lock up the WR's and TE's so the QB doesn't have time to pick us apart.

Even with an upgrade at NT, DT and LDE it is obvious that todays rule changes and offensive strategies allow teams to exploit the zone defenses and can get the ball out before any pass rush can get the kind of pressure the T2 relies on to be effective.

So then why try to upgrade the talent only to still be vulnerable to the very offenses that the rest of the division is already running? It just doesn't make any sense unless you are happy with constantly coming up short against elite teams. Right now we have a lack of talent all the way across the defense and a total rebuild is necessary. If there was ever a time to change things over this is it.

BBQ Platypus
12-18-2011, 03:18 PM
The problem is that even if we improve the secondary and the NT teams like the Bears, Packers, Lions, Pats, Saints etc are always going to carve up the T2 because they exploit the soft zone coverages. The only way we are going to be able to stop these teams is to upgrade the secondary with DB's that can play man defense and lock up the WR's and TE's so the QB doesn't have time to pick us apart.

Even with an upgrade at NT, DT and LDE it is obvious that todays rule changes and offensive strategies allow teams to exploit the zone defenses and can get the ball out before any pass rush can get the kind of pressure the T2 relies on to be effective.

So then why try to upgrade the talent only to still be vulnerable to the very offenses that the rest of the division is already running? It just doesn't make any sense unless you are happy with constantly coming up short against elite teams. Right now we have a lack of talent all the way across the defense and a total rebuild is necessary. If there was ever a time to change things over this is it.
And since when does playing the 4-3 inherently mean that you inherently don't play man-to-man? Teams used to be able to play man-to-man with 4 down linemen just fine. Is this somehow impossible now? Does the 3-4 mean you inherently don't play zone? If I heard the announcers correctly, the Chiefs played mostly zone today...and won.

Frankly, we're already seeing some of the flaws of the 3-4 begin to be exposed. In the NFL before the 3-4, protect-the-pass-first-second-and-third craze began, I don't think Tim Tebow has the success that he's having. Teams are forgetting how to play the run. And when more teams realize that, things will begin to shift back in the other direction.

Talent is the problem, not the scheme. You can change the scheme if you like - it doesn't really make any difference now since we've got almost nothing to work with. Trade JA for picks immediately if you do. We need more draft picks, not an out-of-position linebacker. It's not an AWFUL idea - it's just not a great one that I see an overpowering need for. A deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic type thing. Plus, we're likely to get worse switching to the 3-4 before we get better.

Minniman
12-18-2011, 05:32 PM
4-3 or 3-4?

Neither is better or worse. They both have strengths and weaknesses.

The coaching and players are huge factors. In my opinion, the Vikings are lacking in both areas.

The Vikings should have signed Cameron Wake to a long term contract as left DE when he came out of the CFL. The Vikings lowballed, and that will haunt them. Wake had 14 sacks last season and has 6.5 this year. Wake left and Allen right could have meant monster pressure. Too bad the Dolphins locked Wake up for four years at league minimum.

Robison is not bad, but QB's can hit any of many open receivers on any given play, so it is difficult for the sight-sided end to get a good rush without the ball coming out. The Vikings line coaching is not great, so we do not know how good he can be. Maybe he will not get better; maybe he will.

Minniman
12-18-2011, 05:36 PM
Having Frazier and Singletary run a passive defense just boggles my mind. It is almost like they didn't learn anything about pressure defenses when playing in the Bears' 46.

Minniman
12-18-2011, 05:42 PM
They just had a stat about the Vikings defense over the past 8 games:

72% completion percentage allowed
20 TD's allowed
0 INT's.
128.6 Passer rating allowed.

We need to draft for the secondary far more than the OL. What a mess.

That's as much scheme as players. Can we draft some new coaches?

Purple Floyd
12-18-2011, 06:20 PM
And since when does playing the 4-3 inherently mean that you inherently don't play man-to-man? Teams used to be able to play man-to-man with 4 down linemen just fine. Is this somehow impossible now? Does the 3-4 mean you inherently don't play zone? If I heard the announcers correctly, the Chiefs played mostly zone today...and won.

Frankly, we're already seeing some of the flaws of the 3-4 begin to be exposed. In the NFL before the 3-4, protect-the-pass-first-second-and-third craze began, I don't think Tim Tebow has the success that he's having. Teams are forgetting how to play the run. And when more teams realize that, things will begin to shift back in the other direction.

Talent is the problem, not the scheme. You can change the scheme if you like - it doesn't really make any difference now since we've got almost nothing to work with. Trade JA for picks immediately if you do. We need more draft picks, not an out-of-position linebacker. It's not an AWFUL idea - it's just not a great one that I see an overpowering need for. A deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic type thing. Plus, we're likely to get worse switching to the 3-4 before we get better.

You probably can and to be honest if the team showed any competence in doing anything of that sort then I would be on board but until they start talking about doing a straight up 4-3 and not this zone based abomination then I am against it.

Another thing the 3-4 gives is flexibility. It is much easier to disguise blitzes and coverages and you get faster, more flexible players on the field which can really help when the Packers spread you out.

Whichever way they go if it involves a zone coverage and not a man coverage base they might just as well cash it in and join the CFL.

Minniman
12-18-2011, 07:21 PM
Whichever way they go if it involves a zone coverage and not a man coverage base they might just as well cash it in and join the CFL.

The CFL runs man coverages.

Reignman
12-18-2011, 07:51 PM
They just had a stat about the Vikings defense over the past 8 games:

72% completion percentage allowed
20 TD's allowed
0 INT's.
128.6 Passer rating allowed.

We need to draft for the secondary far more than the OL. What a mess.Good golly those are some eye popping numbers right there. And now I'm going to update them to include the Saints game for shock value.

73.4%
267 yds/g
25 TD's
0 INT's
132.1 passer rating

You'd be hard pressed to put up numbers like that in Madden on rookie mode. And if anyone even remembers the game, our last INT came against Arizona on Oct 9th.

tastywaves
12-19-2011, 10:30 AM
Good golly those are some eye popping numbers right there. And now I'm going to update them to include the Saints game for shock value.

73.4%
267 yds/g
25 TD's
0 INT's
132.1 passer rating

You'd be hard pressed to put up numbers like that in Madden on rookie mode. And if anyone even remembers the game, our last INT came against Arizona on Oct 9th.

Yea, that's beyond humiliation. Zero pressure and very soft coverage with safeties that are always 2 steps late from doing anything significant. We're hardly even a practice squad team for the likes of NO these days.

The NFL really should look at fining the likes of MN for not being able to put a quality team together and resemble something of an entertainment value. It's embarrassing to the whole league.

bleedpurple
12-20-2011, 10:54 AM
It's embarrassing Frazier is our coach and will still be next year!!... Spielman screwed up the Dolphins.. and now he has screwed up the Vikings... two of the most storied franchises in the League... thanks Rick.. Thanks Zigi for hiring ESPN talking heads to run our football team!!

Marrdro
12-20-2011, 11:29 AM
Riddle me this people, why would you want to switch to a 3-4? Haven't you seen how many teams are now moving away from it? The time to convert to the 3-4 was about 8 or 9 years ago not now, after offenses have figured out how to exploit it.


Another question, why Singletary for cripes sake. Have you seen the turn around in SF without him there? That defense hasn't given up a rushing TD all year. Hell, look at our LB'r corps this year. Its taken a step back from being one of our strengths to a mediocre group of lost souls who don't know whats expected of them.

Mike was the man in uniform, but he's just another bust picked up by Frazier that needs to go, just like the 3-4 is going.

jargomcfargo
12-20-2011, 11:48 AM
Another question, why Singletary for cripes sake. Have you seen the turn around in SF without him there? That defense hasn't given up a rushing TD all year. Hell, look at our LB'r corps this year. Its taken a step back from being one of our strengths to a mediocre group of lost souls who don't know whats expected of them.

Mike was the man in uniform, but he's just another bust picked up by Frazier that needs to go, just like the 3-4 is going.

Right on when it comes to Singletary. He should be canned.

Marrdro
12-20-2011, 11:52 AM
Right on when it comes to Singletary. He should be canned.
LOL, you crack me up.

I can't believe anyone on here would even consider that cat for our HC. The ones that did must not watch much football as they don't have a clue whats going on out there in SF under a new COACH that brought in a staff that can COACH.

jmcdon00
12-20-2011, 12:49 PM
I think they should use some 3-4 some 4-3. Some zone and some man to man. Some base coverages and some blitzes. Sometimes you have 4 Dbacks other times 5 Dbacsk or 3 Dbacks. This is chess not checkers, mix it up, keep them guessing.
What kills the vikings is not that they run a tampa two, it's that they run it play after play after play.(and there obvious lack of talent doesn't help).

Purple Floyd
12-20-2011, 06:33 PM
LOL, you crack me up.

I can't believe anyone on here would even consider that cat for our HC. The ones that did must not watch much football as they don't have a clue whats going on out there in SF under a new COACH that brought in a staff that can COACH.

And a 3-4 defense I might add, but I am sure that you are never going to acknowledge they switched from a 4-3 last year to a 3-4 this year and got exponentially better.:haha:

bleedpurple
12-21-2011, 10:09 AM
And a 3-4 defense I might add, but I am sure that you are never going to acknowledge they switched from a 4-3 last year to a 3-4 this year and got exponentially better.:haha:

UHHH.. somehow i doubt we have the personnel to even remotely competently run a 3-4 scheme... I agree with Marrdro why would we do that now??... Additionally, our best player on Defense... / highest paid player. .Jared Allen you completely take away his strengths... Can you imagine him in coverage on a regular basis..? what about EJ and Erin and Greenway??.. LB's are arguably in worse shape than the secondary.. and you wanna move to a 3-4???? Plus the D-line is our strength on defense... completely pointless to run a 3-4...

UNLESS.. we turn to a hybrid 3-4 / 4-3 scheme and mix it up.. but i highly doubt our players are smart enough to learn a new scheme week in and week out A-LA New England does.. and I even moreso doubt we have to coaching staff to execute the teaching necessary to do it...

Plus, the worst part about moving to a 3-4.... A defense in transition arguably gives Frazier another year to transition to a 3-4....


SO MANY BAD REASONS TO GO TO A 3-4... I could go on and on....

i_bleed_purple
12-21-2011, 10:13 AM
UHHH.. somehow i doubt we have the personnel to even remotely competently run a 3-4 scheme...
Somebody who gets it!


I agree with Marrdro why would we do that now??... Additionally, our best player on Defense... / highest paid player. .Jared Allen you completely take away his strengths... Can you imagine him in coverage on a regular basis..? what about EJ and Erin and Greenway??.. LB's are arguably in worse shape than the secondary.. and you wanna move to a 3-4???? Plus the D-line is our strength on defense... completely pointless to run a 3-4...

UNLESS.. we turn to a hybrid 3-4 / 4-3 scheme and mix it up.. but i highly doubt our players are smart enough to learn a new scheme week in and week out A-LA New England does.. and I even moreso doubt we have to coaching staff to execute the teaching necessary to do it...

Plus, the worst part about moving to a 3-4.... A defense in transition arguably gives Frazier another year to transition to a 3-4....


SO MANY BAD REASONS TO GO TO A 3-4... I could go on and on....

Solve all our problems, switch to a 1-5-5 prowl Can't possibly not work.

bleedpurple
12-21-2011, 10:16 AM
Having Frazier and Singletary run a passive defense just boggles my mind. It is almost like they didn't learn anything about pressure defenses when playing in the Bears' 46.




Somebody who gets it!


Solve all our problems, switch to a 1-5-5 prowl Can't possibly not work.

LOL... like the skins did few times last year??... they had 1 or 2 DL's and a bunch of LB's and CB's in the game a few times... hilarious...

i_bleed_purple
12-21-2011, 10:25 AM
LOL... like the skins did few times last year??... they had 1 or 2 DL's and a bunch of LB's and CB's in the game a few times... hilarious...

I was thinking more like the Ravens do.

Throw in a NT, swap out the ends for bigger LB's.

If you want a way to completely exploit the Vikings, this is it. Actually, it's genius, we'll have such bad players out there, teams won't be able to figure out who to throw on first.

............................Sanford..........Raymond

................Erin.....Greenway....EJ....Onatolu......Dean
Griff...Allen............................................................Sherels
...........................................Ayodele


How can that D not shut down everyone?

bleedpurple
12-21-2011, 11:56 AM
I was thinking more like the Ravens do.

Throw in a NT, swap out the ends for bigger LB's.

If you want a way to completely exploit the Vikings, this is it. Actually, it's genius, we'll have such bad players out there, teams won't be able to figure out who to throw on first.

............................Sanford..........Raymond

................Erin.....Greenway....EJ....Onatolu......Dean
Griff...Allen............................................................Sherels
...........................................Ayodele


How can that D not shut down everyone?

easy... look at the bumbs you have out there... lol

on a side note, we waited entirely too long to fix the o-line and the defense... not to mention thinking jenkins and aromashadu was the answer on the outside...

Purple Floyd
12-21-2011, 12:23 PM
UHHH.. somehow i doubt we have the personnel to even remotely competently run a 3-4 scheme... I agree with Marrdro why would we do that now??... Additionally, our best player on Defense... / highest paid player. .Jared Allen you completely take away his strengths... Can you imagine him in coverage on a regular basis..? what about EJ and Erin and Greenway??.. LB's are arguably in worse shape than the secondary.. and you wanna move to a 3-4???? Plus the D-line is our strength on defense... completely pointless to run a 3-4...

UNLESS.. we turn to a hybrid 3-4 / 4-3 scheme and mix it up.. but i highly doubt our players are smart enough to learn a new scheme week in and week out A-LA New England does.. and I even moreso doubt we have to coaching staff to execute the teaching necessary to do it...

Plus, the worst part about moving to a 3-4.... A defense in transition arguably gives Frazier another year to transition to a 3-4....


SO MANY BAD REASONS TO GO TO A 3-4... I could go on and on....



They were saying that in San Fran too but it seems to be working. As far as personnel, we need to turn over 80% of the defense anyway...... No better time to do it but if you like having the rest of the division pick apart the C2 for the next 5 years then I guess we can agree to disagree.

Freakout
12-21-2011, 12:24 PM
UHHH.. somehow i doubt we have the personnel to even remotely competently run a 3-4 scheme... I agree with Marrdro why would we do that now??... Additionally, our best player on Defense... / highest paid player. .Jared Allen you completely take away his strengths... Can you imagine him in coverage on a regular basis..? what about EJ and Erin and Greenway??.. LB's are arguably in worse shape than the secondary.. and you wanna move to a 3-4???? Plus the D-line is our strength on defense... completely pointless to run a 3-4...

UNLESS.. we turn to a hybrid 3-4 / 4-3 scheme and mix it up.. but i highly doubt our players are smart enough to learn a new scheme week in and week out A-LA New England does.. and I even moreso doubt we have to coaching staff to execute the teaching necessary to do it...

Plus, the worst part about moving to a 3-4.... A defense in transition arguably gives Frazier another year to transition to a 3-4....


SO MANY BAD REASONS TO GO TO A 3-4... I could go on and on....

Well even if we stay in a 43 base we need a new secondary. We need at least 1 new linebacker. We need a DT/NT that can actually keep teams from running through our line.

In a 34 we still need a NT. Kevin and Guion can play DE. Everson Griffen would be a stud 34 OLB in my opinion. EJ Henderson has always been more suited as a 34 ILB and the same goes for Jasper Brinkley if he is healthy. Greenway wouldn't fit that well. Jared is the real question but we already drop him back into coverage at times and he does a pretty good job. With Jared I believe he would be a terror no matter how he lined up.

And again we need a new secondary either way.

Purple Floyd
12-21-2011, 12:26 PM
Well even if we stay in a 43 base we need a new secondary. We need at least 1 new linebacker. We need a DT/NT that can actually keep teams from running through our line.

In a 34 we still need a NT. Kevin and Guion can play DE. Everson Griffen would be a stud 34 OLB in my opinion. EJ Henderson has always been more suited as a 34 ILB and the same goes for Jasper Brinkley if he is healthy. Greenway wouldn't fit that well. Jared is the real question but we already drop him back into coverage at times and he does a pretty good job. With Jared I believe he would be a terror no matter how he lined up.

And again we need a new secondary either way.

Someone who gets it.

bleedpurple
12-21-2011, 01:47 PM
Someone who gets it.

I see no reason to move to a 3-4... people act like you can't throw or score on a 3-4 defense... Regardless of the scheme we need players and specifically a D-coordinator to run that scheme... With our defensive line being the strength of our defense.. and linebackers being a staple of ALL 3-4 defenses and us not having very good ones... We would be changing to a scheme that makes would neutralize our strengths with is the D-line and only further weaken our weaknesses... Linebackers and secondary...

To me it makes no sense unless your going to overhall the entire defense... We dont' have one guy on the roster that could tie up 5 blockers in order to let our linebackers make all the plays... which is what a 3-4 is designed to do...

Additionally, why would we switch when we just spent 6 high draft picks (rounds 1-4) on Allen, Ballard, Robison, and Guion since 2008.

I understand blowing it up.. but damn... I don't get switching schemes when all those guys are 4-3 players and very good players at that... it doesn't make sense... IMO...

bleedpurple
12-21-2011, 01:50 PM
If we were gonna switch to the 3-4 we shoulda done it years ago... and before more than half the league started doing it...

Change the 4-3 philosphy we have in playing the cover 2 scheme and do more creative blitzing, man to man coverage, disguising schemes, actually let our corners cover instead of playing a zone, and getting more athletic linebackers and a safety who is a play maker (a-la sharper back in the day) and i think our defense will be much much better... We don't let our safeties do much and we took too much away from sharper his last year instead of letting him or whomever else be a ball hawk back there... it's the play calling and game planning that should change not the type of scheme..

Purple Floyd
12-21-2011, 05:45 PM
I see no reason to move to a 3-4... people act like you can't throw or score on a 3-4 defense...

Not at all. It isn't that you cannot throw against the defense. My stance is simply that it gives the defense the ability to present many more looks and allows the defense to pressure in different ways than the C2 we are running. Simply put, the rules have been changed to allow offenses to put more pressure on defenses.
A zone defense like the C2 will always have holes in it and teams like the packers, Pats, Steelers etc are going to be able to exploit those zones and unless we decide to go to a man coverage against them we don't stand a chance. If having opponents run up and down the field on our defense is what you consider to be a good time then we have different expectations.



Regardless of the scheme we need players and specifically a D-coordinator to run that scheme... With our defensive line being the strength of our defense.. and linebackers being a staple of ALL 3-4 defenses and us not having very good ones... We would be changing to a scheme that makes would neutralize our strengths with is the D-line and only further weaken our weaknesses... Linebackers and secondary...

I would have conceded that point to you earlier but at this point with the exception of Allen there isn't a guy on the D line that we can't do without. And I really think Everson could be a 3-4 LB. I also think Ballard could be a 3-4 DT so all we would need is a NT that we also need in a 4-3 so that is a wash.


To me it makes no sense unless your going to overhall the entire defense...

Since that is my goal I guess it makes perfect sense. There is no band aid that is going to fix this defense.

But look at it this way- Both the Texans and the Niners switched to a 3-4 this year, didn't undertake a huge restructuring in personnel on the field, and now are two of the most improved defenses in the NFL. Also, people talk about Jared Allen not being able to play the 3-4 but interestingly Mario Williams and Justin Smith have done just fine:

Justin Smith: The best 3-4 end in the NFL | Yardbarker.com (http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/justin_smith_the_best_3_4_end_in_the_nfl/7883188)

Chances are, you won't need a whole handful of fingers to fully enumerate the number of guys who’ve successfully made a transition in recent years from 4-3 defensive end to the same position in a 3-4 front. Then again, you might require an index finger thrust in the air to characterize the status of 49ers veteran Justin Smith among the few defenders who have effectively made the tricky conversion.


And on Mario Williams plus an article with some interesting stuff from Wade Phillips that you should read:
Phillips clarifies plans for Williams in (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-3/Phillips-clarifies-plans-for-Williams-in-%E2%80%9C5-2%E2%80%9D-front/22e614bb-8639-4cee-834c-ee09ee32910a)


The Texans’ decision to move Mario Williamshttp://www.houstontexans.com/assets/nflimg/icon-article-link.gif (http://www.houstontexans.com/team/roster/mario-williams/b7a46f5f-06da-4130-b463-d6c3ddfbd8d0/)
to outside linebacker has sparked plenty of hoopla and debate. Williams has been one of the most productive pass rushers in the NFL as a 4-3 defensive end, and he’ll be an unconventionally large linebacker at 6-6, 290 pounds.On Monday, defensive coordinator Wade Phillips said that Williams essentially will still be an end in his defense – he’ll just be on his feet more.“They say ‘3-4’, ‘4-3’, all that,” Phillips said at the Texans' annual Charity Golf Classic. “We really play a 5-2. We play five defensive linemen that can rush the passer and two inside 'backers who can tackle people. And we think Mario certainly fits in there.”In that 5-2 front, Williams will often be standing up on the right edge of the defensive line as the Will (weakside outside) linebacker.




We dont' have one guy on the roster that could tie up 5 blockers in order to let our linebackers make all the plays... which is what a 3-4 is designed to do...

You think the 3-4 requires 1 player to tie up 5 blockers? :rofl:


Additionally, why would we switch when we just spent 6 high draft picks (rounds 1-4) on Allen, Ballard, Robison, and Guion since 2008.

Because we are more than likely finishing the season at 2-14 and the defense just plain sucks. On top of that the top teams in the league can neutralize a zone defense and no matter how many players we change out the scheme is not going to be able to stop them on a consistent basis.


I understand blowing it up.. but damn... I don't get switching schemes when all those guys are 4-3 players and very good players at that... it doesn't make sense... IMO...

If those players were that good we wouldn't have only 2 wins right now.

MaxVike
12-21-2011, 06:54 PM
Good... not great... too many Vikings fans are willing to settle for mediocrity.

I guess it's too much to ask for a great team.

"Settle." Hmmmmmm...if I may. We fans cheer, root, yell, display passion, argue, analyze, and invest time and money. If Coaches, Owners, General Managers, settle for mediocrity, by the nature of business, they lose their jobs.

With respect, we fans support.....regardless of success, that's what a fan is/does. Coaches and Management, work to win and provide we fans with a great "product." We fans choose how we spend our time and money, our livelihood is not defined by the success of our favorite Team, at least I would hope as such. My point is simple.........we can debate all day long, and, per PP.O, we can get trivial and sophomoric about the debate; but, we are fans, and not even close to being accountable.

Fans don't settle, we have opinions, points of view, perspectives, money. Our ultimate vote, in the grand scheme of the NFL is our money. Now, don't mistake my point for a guy that has "settled." I just am a fan who is trying to support my Team. To be clear, if I were Shiancoe, and I felt the rest of PP.O mailed it in...I would call you out too... If We Fans participate by going to games and buying shit when our Team sucks, I guess you could argue that we are settling for mediocrity. But, that argument is flawed due to the fact that those are our most impactful ways to support our Team. So, stopping to go to games, and buy shit (merchandise, NFL Sunday Ticket) is not something I will do, as a fan. Am I happy the Vikes are 2-12? FUCK NO. Do I have many opinions? FUCK YES.

I hope that being a fan of the Vikes, who, BY THE WAY, has been through more than the majority of you, is not 'settling."

Ownership and Players, in the real world of work or get fired, settle. We fans settle with our checkbook.

Purple Floyd
12-21-2011, 07:12 PM
Fans Settle when they don't agree with the direction of the team but still support the team with their checkbook at the same rate they do when the team is winning and doing what they want them to.

jmcdon00
12-21-2011, 07:30 PM
Fans Settle when they don't agree with the direction of the team but still support the team with their checkbook at the same rate they do when the team is winning and doing what they want them to.I only buy playoff tickets when the team is doing well, I hope that doesn't make me a fairweather fan.

Purple Floyd
12-21-2011, 08:32 PM
Lol

MaxVike
12-21-2011, 09:13 PM
Fans Settle when they don't agree with the direction of the team but still support the team with their checkbook at the same rate they do when the team is winning and doing what they want them to.

A more succinct way of saying exactly what I did...

So, is the suggestion a mutiny? A boycott? Should I cancel Sunday Ticket and buy an iPad? Maybe None of us should buy our kids a Harvin, Peterson, Ponder, or Allen jersey for Christmas?

Or, Is the answer constant complaining, criticizing, second guessing? See PP.O.

marshallvike
12-21-2011, 09:41 PM
This is now officially the Purple thread. (see all prior posts)