HawkGA":2sajeubl said:Interesting idea. I actually think the most important argument comes toward the end. With not many defensive linemen, and those that they have largely being versatile inside/out guys, going with just three linemen could be a good idea. They've got the right bodies, I would think, for that kind of scheme but keeping 3 linebackers and 5 DBs gives them some flexibility on rushing a 4th from an unknown spot.
Tical21":25a98srv said:We've deployed a 3-2-6 in the past, with Lawyer Milloy coming in as an extra LB, subbing in for the DT. So it was kind of like a 3-3-5, I guess.
Sgt. Largent":396mbizw said:This SI article seems like something one of us would write in here, and not in a good way..................as in "hey I just thought of this hairbrained defensive scheme without looking at our current personnel at all before writing this cause it sounds really cool!"
Clowney already got double teamed more than any other D-lineman in the league, so now you're only going to put TWO other lineman next to him? Lol, dude's gonna get quadruple.
And we don't even the defensive backfield to run our normal cover 3 without getting toasted. Five defensive backs require five VERY good defensive backs, and we've got 2-3. You wanna put more pressure on already shaky DB's like Flowers and Amadi?
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but this article is garbage.
Jville":37c5sj7c said:Sgt. Largent":37c5sj7c said:This SI article seems like something one of us would write in here, and not in a good way..................as in "hey I just thought of this hairbrained defensive scheme without looking at our current personnel at all before writing this cause it sounds really cool!"
Clowney already got double teamed more than any other D-lineman in the league, so now you're only going to put TWO other lineman next to him? Lol, dude's gonna get quadruple.
And we don't even the defensive backfield to run our normal cover 3 without getting toasted. Five defensive backs require five VERY good defensive backs, and we've got 2-3. You wanna put more pressure on already shaky DB's like Flowers and Amadi?
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but this article is garbage.
Disappointed to read that. The state of the game is always changing. Each side of the line of scrimmage adjusting to the other ..... looking for an edge.
The article is speculation about the usefulness of a specific personnel group for possible inclusion in a 2020 defensive play book. Many find such speculation both entertaining and relevant. Understanding that in the off season, teams review the previous season's outcomes. Then contemplate making scheme and personnel adjustments prior to assembling and building a team for the next (2020) campaign.
But to each their own. With such a collection of forum members from so many different walks of life, reviews of any article will most often result in mixed reactions.
Go Hawks!
Sgt. Largent":1a5jnzp7 said:Jville":1a5jnzp7 said:Sgt. Largent":1a5jnzp7 said:This SI article seems like something one of us would write in here, and not in a good way..................as in "hey I just thought of this hairbrained defensive scheme without looking at our current personnel at all before writing this cause it sounds really cool!"
Clowney already got double teamed more than any other D-lineman in the league, so now you're only going to put TWO other lineman next to him? Lol, dude's gonna get quadruple.
And we don't even the defensive backfield to run our normal cover 3 without getting toasted. Five defensive backs require five VERY good defensive backs, and we've got 2-3. You wanna put more pressure on already shaky DB's like Flowers and Amadi?
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but this article is garbage.
Disappointed to read that. The state of the game is always changing. Each side of the line of scrimmage adjusting to the other ..... looking for an edge.
The article is speculation about the usefulness of a specific personnel group for possible inclusion in a 2020 defensive play book. Many find such speculation both entertaining and relevant. Understanding that in the off season, teams review the previous season's outcomes. Then contemplate making scheme and personnel adjustments prior to assembling and building a team for the next (2020) campaign.
But to each their own. With such a collection of forum members from so many different walks of life, reviews of any article will most often result in mixed reactions.
Go Hawks!
No one, including me is arguing against scheme tweaks or changes, but don't come at us with said scheme change when our defensive personnel was so bad last year we had to play base 40% of the time.
This defensive roster can't even play base, and the author wants us to employ a 3-3-5, and justifies it with pointing out Clowney who isn't even on the roster, and Wagner as cornerstones?
So it's not the scheme I'm against, I'm sure we could benefit from mixing it up scheme wise...........but don't come at with this nonsense when our personnel can't even play base well enough. This would require three studs on the D-line (we have none), two other LB's that are at LEAST 80% of what Wagner is to cover sideline to sideline, blitz and fill gaps.........AND at least two upgrades in the defensive backfield.
Jville":20qod4e6 said:Sgt. Largent":20qod4e6 said:Jville":20qod4e6 said:Sgt. Largent":20qod4e6 said:This SI article seems like something one of us would write in here, and not in a good way..................as in "hey I just thought of this hairbrained defensive scheme without looking at our current personnel at all before writing this cause it sounds really cool!"
Clowney already got double teamed more than any other D-lineman in the league, so now you're only going to put TWO other lineman next to him? Lol, dude's gonna get quadruple.
And we don't even the defensive backfield to run our normal cover 3 without getting toasted. Five defensive backs require five VERY good defensive backs, and we've got 2-3. You wanna put more pressure on already shaky DB's like Flowers and Amadi?
I'm all for thinking outside the box, but this article is garbage.
Disappointed to read that. The state of the game is always changing. Each side of the line of scrimmage adjusting to the other ..... looking for an edge.
The article is speculation about the usefulness of a specific personnel group for possible inclusion in a 2020 defensive play book. Many find such speculation both entertaining and relevant. Understanding that in the off season, teams review the previous season's outcomes. Then contemplate making scheme and personnel adjustments prior to assembling and building a team for the next (2020) campaign.
But to each their own. With such a collection of forum members from so many different walks of life, reviews of any article will most often result in mixed reactions.
Go Hawks!
No one, including me is arguing against scheme tweaks or changes, but don't come at us with said scheme change when our defensive personnel was so bad last year we had to play base 40% of the time.
This defensive roster can't even play base, and the author wants us to employ a 3-3-5, and justifies it with pointing out Clowney who isn't even on the roster, and Wagner as cornerstones?
So it's not the scheme I'm against, I'm sure we could benefit from mixing it up scheme wise...........but don't come at with this nonsense when our personnel can't even play base well enough. This would require three studs on the D-line (we have none), two other LB's that are at LEAST 80% of what Wagner is to cover sideline to sideline, blitz and fill gaps.........AND at least two upgrades in the defensive backfield.
If I read your objections correctly, the subject of your dissatisfaction is focused on last year's roster. That's a different subject that's now fading in the rear view mirror. Where as the speculative article is cognizant of an advancing timeline.
IndyHawk":3e8o18wh said:Ha ha ..This isn't video games
If this is last year the QB would stand there all day
and pick us apart after (2-3) 6 yrd running plays.
I should have included this but yes that is correct.Largent80":t8s19lak said:IndyHawk":t8s19lak said:Ha ha ..This isn't video games
If this is last year the QB would stand there all day
and pick us apart after (2-3) 6 yrd running plays.
But this is a description of exactly what we saw LAST year. Not enough talent to run any scheme successfully.