4-3 for the long-haul?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from arodrambone. Show arodrambone's posts

    4-3 for the long-haul?

    It seems like we are getting to the point where with one draft and FA period we could field a very solid 4-3 base defense for several years.

    McKenzie should be a decent 4-3 OLB, as should Guyton. Mayo can play MLB quite well.

    Brace should make a decent Nose tackle when we switched to 3-4 a minority of the time, if the finances don't quite make sense and Wilfork is allowed to leave or traded. Seymour is already gone, and Thomas is looking like he is on his way out after this year. Vrabel and Bruschi are already gone.

    More and more teams switch to 3-4 every year, meaning those RARE 3-4 ends and nose tackles are always taken high in the draft, like Tyson Jackson going #3 to KC and Raji going to the Packers at #9.

    The skills needed to succeed as a 3-4 OLB are so RARE that BB refused to draft a single one with 4 second round picks and a handful of seemingly promising prospects available.

    Every position in the front 7 of a 3-4 defense requires a very rare set of skills and physical attributes. Perhaps it's time to call it a nice run and consider the 3-4 an alternate look, instead of the primary formation. Perhaps we're already well on our way now.

    Looking back, the Patriots were extremely lucky to have landed Seymour, Warren, and Wilfork in such quick succession. A terrible season helped land Seymour, good relations with the Bears enabled us to trade up for Warren for a box of peanuts, and Wilfork unexpectedly slid all the way to us. We were also lucky to grab Vrabel off the scrap heap and enjoy his emergence as a prototypical 3-4 strongside linebacker.

    Expecting to draft what BB desires in a 3-4 OLB might just be too much to ask again this year, as well as another top 3-4 end.

    Wilfork plays a position that is in demand 3rd only to QB and Left Tackle, and he will get paid some serious dough in all likelihood.

    Most college teams play 4-3, and the drafting process is somewhat less of a guessing game when you aren't expecting the player to switch positions to something they've rarely if ever played before.

    What is the draft pool looking like for 4-3 front 7 prospects, from the late first round through the second?

    Could we field a formidable, deep, and long-term front 7 with just one FA period and draft?

    We would definitely need at least one 4-3 OLB, as expecting both McKenzie and Guyton to work out as starters would be too much to ask.
     
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: 4-3 for the long-haul?

    In Response to 4-3 for the long-haul?:
    [QUOTE]It seems like we are getting to the point where with one draft and FA period we could field a very solid 4-3 base defense for several years. McKenzie should be a decent 4-3 OLB, as should Guyton. Mayo can play MLB quite well. Brace should make a decent Nose tackle when we switched to 3-4 a minority of the time, if the finances don't quite make sense and Wilfork is allowed to leave or traded. Seymour is already gone, and Thomas is looking like he is on his way out after this year. Vrabel and Bruschi are already gone. More and more teams switch to 3-4 every year, meaning those RARE 3-4 ends and nose tackles are always taken high in the draft, like Tyson Jackson going #3 to KC and Raji going to the Packers at #9. The skills needed to succeed as a 3-4 OLB are so RARE that BB refused to draft a single one with 4 second round picks and a handful of seemingly promising prospects available. Every position in the front 7 of a 3-4 defense requires a very rare set of skills and physical attributes. Perhaps it's time to call it a nice run and consider the 3-4 an alternate look, instead of the primary formation. Perhaps we're already well on our way now. Looking back, the Patriots were extremely lucky to have landed Seymour, Warren, and Wilfork in such quick succession. A terrible season helped land Seymour, good relations with the Bears enabled us to trade up for Warren for a box of peanuts, and Wilfork unexpectedly slid all the way to us. We were also lucky to grab Vrabel off the scrap heap and enjoy his emergence as a prototypical 3-4 strongside linebacker. Expecting to draft what BB desires in a 3-4 OLB might just be too much to ask again this year, as well as another top 3-4 end. Wilfork plays a position that is in demand 3rd only to QB and Left Tackle, and he will get paid some serious dough in all likelihood. Most college teams play 4-3, and the drafting process is somewhat less of a guessing game when you aren't expecting the player to switch positions to something they've rarely if ever played before. What is the draft pool looking like for 4-3 front 7 prospects, from the late first round through the second? Could we field a formidable, deep, and long-term front 7 with just one FA period and draft? We would definitely need at least one 4-3 OLB, as expecting both McKenzie and Guyton to work out as starters would be too much to ask.  
    Posted by arodrambone[/QUOTE]

    The short answer is that we'll never convert to a 4/3 team unless injuries dictate that we do...  3/4 outside linebackers are easier to acquire than defensive tackles.
     

Share