If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Hooligan · Post by **Hooligan** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 10:27 pm

With Haz's popularity down, I've been wondering what a new DC would bring to the table. Many people here have been calling for a return to the 4-3, so I've been wondering how well our current players would fit that scheme. Do we already have the personnel or would we need to acquire some different players to make it work?

My guess would be: DE - Hatcher and J. Jenkins, DT - Cofield and Baker. WLB - K. Robinson, MLB - Riley, SLB - Kerrigan. Seems like we'd be a run-stopping powerhouse, but could the front four get to the QB? Does Murphy fit in anywhere? Does Kerrigan take a DE spot with Murphy playing LB?

masterkwon · Post by **masterkwon** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 10:37 pm

It really makes no difference. History shows they're gonna suck whatever they do.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:00 pm

There's a really good chance that we stay with the 3-4 ... the scheme had nothing to do with our failures on defense this season

a long, long time ago it might have made sense but not now ...

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:26 am

Hooligan wrote:With Haz's popularity down, I've been wondering what a new DC would bring to the table. Many people here have been calling for a return to the 4-3, so I've been wondering how well our current players would fit that scheme. Do we already have the personnel or would we need to acquire some different players to make it work?

My guess would be: DE - Hatcher and J. Jenkins, DT - Cofield and Baker. WLB - K. Robinson, MLB - Riley, SLB - Kerrigan. Seems like we'd be a run-stopping powerhouse, but could the front four get to the QB? Does Murphy fit in anywhere? Does Kerrigan take a DE spot with Murphy playing LB?

I've been wondering the same thing. Seems like we never really got the D line for a 3-4 but did get the linebackers, well, Kerrigan at least. I'd want someone besides Perry Riley as our Mike but I think we'd be real good at the other 6 of the front 7 the way you lay it out.

Now let's play Breeland and ? in man coverage with Thomas and ?? at safety.

And who runs this thing?

StorminMormon86 · Post by **StorminMormon86** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:34 am

I think our front 7 has been pretty good all year. We obviously need to beef up our secondary.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 11:40 am

masterkwon wrote:It really makes no difference. History shows they're gonna suck whatever they do.

That's just not true. We had a lot of years where our defense played well, totally wasted on an inept offense.

I don't know this for sure, but it seems to me that its easier to fix and put together a good defense than an offense. Anybody with coaching experience want to comment on that?

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:38 pm

Weve spent what 4 years converting to a 3/4, going back now that we are close to having the personnel seems foolish.
NT
Safety
oline
In no particular order is our FA targets and draft BPA that fits one of those needs in the top three rounds.

This D isnt all that far off.. but going backwards cant help in the short term imo

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:55 pm

as has been pointed out a number of times - there are a number of times during the game that we use a 4-3 as do many 3-4 defenses

it's not the scheme, it's the execution - that being said, I would find it hard to believe that we have Haslett here next season ...

however - our defense is not (despite what some think) getting better just by changing DC - if the new guy comes in and puts players in position to succeed and they don't do what they're mean't to, the defense does not work

I would like a really good defensive lineman but all these players have got to put people on the ground - missed tackles are a huge issue

PAPDOG67 · Post by **PAPDOG67** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:05 pm

That is where you are wrong. Getting rid of Haslett would be addition by subtraction......like as in maybe we can actually get off the field on a 3rd and long for a change.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:45 pm

riggofan wrote:
masterkwon wrote:It really makes no difference. History shows they're gonna suck whatever they do.

That's just not true.

He's just trolling.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:34 pm

PAPDOG67 wrote:That is where you are wrong. Getting rid of Haslett would be addition by subtraction - like, maybe we can actually get off the field on a 3rd and long for a change.

I think Haslett is gone but there are many other factors that contributed to this let down defensively - it's not all because of the DC

I'm not wrong, you just don't agree - you're not that knowledgeable either :twisted:

Haslett has not done a good job IMO ... but it's very naive to think that it's all because he's the DC

that's as stupid as saying the offense does not work because of the QB - it's just not a player or a coach - sorry! :roll:

tribeofjudah · Post by **tribeofjudah** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 8:46 pm

masterkwon wrote:It really makes no difference. History shows they're gonna suck whatever they do.

seems like a disenchanted fan OR a pukes fan infiltrated our ranks.

Neo · Post by **Neo** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:55 pm

The league is too pass heavy now. Plus we already run the 4-3 more than the 3-4 according to last year's statistics. I could be wrong, but I think it equated to a 60/40 split.

The schemes within those scheme and the execution therein is our issue. That's a coaching problem. Worst part, some of these players that we think are worthless might actually have something in them that Haz can't bring out.

We were a good 4-3 years ago because we had a good coach and great cast of players. Thy would have been just as good if they were a 3-4 for those same two reasons.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 11:53 pm

We are not "returning" to the 4-3 - we just need to execute the plays better - it's not the system ....

Haslett should be gone but that is not near as important as being able to address the secondary issues and having a better pass rush

our defensive issues were exacerbated by both the offensive woes and injuries - we had little depth and the secondary was a big factor

IMO the defense will be better - if Gruden thinks the defense should continue to be run by Haslett, that's good enough for me, he's the HC

players & coaches will be scrutinized this coming off season and hopefully that is done by guys that know what they're doing

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:56 am

Hazs third down calls are the worst in the league. Numbers dont lie.
We are lucky phili botched a fg om 4 th and short- had they gone for it theyd have got it, like the numerous teams before them.
Save the Dullass game he gets worked like a Noob om Madden every week. He gets cute and fancy instead of straight up.

His departure will instantly equate to a better D, no room to go except up! While we need to be successful in the offseason, the new coach will have a solid foundation with which to work. Getting off the field on third down and forever a couple times next year will be nearly a 100% improvement!!!

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?

Re: If we returned to a 4-3 defense, who starts?