2007 Offseason: Defense

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
To put it lightly, our defense sucked last year. As a unit, we were way too predictable with our pass rush and coverage teams, and as a result got burned by some relatively bad teams (Vernan friggin' Morency chalked up over 100 yards against us; VERNAND MORENCY?!). What this defense really needs to inject some creativity and life into it is a change of pace, and that change of pace comes from the move to a 3-4 scheme.

Clancy Pendergast has always been billed as one of the most creative and blitz happy minds in football, and what better way to flex that ingeniouty than with the 3-4? Of course transitions such as this always come with a bit of adversity, but as of right now we have alot of key pieces that we can mold to fit the scheme. Change can be a good thing, especially when it's on a team that hasn't had a nine win season in almost a decade.

Defensive end's Bertrand Berry and Chike Okeafor are both over thirty years old and don't have that much left in the tank. Darnell Dockett was build to be a 3-4 defensive end, and I think could make the transition relatively easily. That's one spot locked down. As for the other one, I think that Bert has some of the size capable to play the position, and would probably end up starting there. However, Bert isn't exactly a spring chicken, and his back-up/future replacement lies in our first round selection of Alan Branch out of Michigan. Branch might have a big body, but his freakish athleticism leads me to believe that he'd be great as a 3-4 DE. Branch has already had experience as a 3-4 DE in his time at Michigan, and would just dare teams to run on us.

Defensive tackle might be a little harder to fit. Gabe Watson surely is a great physical fit for the position, but he needs help with his drive and keeping away from the buffet. Enter second round pick DeMarcus "Tank" Tyler. Tank plays with a definite mean streak, and could provide a fierce rotation with Watson. Both bring a very physical and stout presence to the middle of the line. We could also see Kendrick Clancy come in on obvious passing downs to pressure the QB.

Linebacker Karlos Dansby doesn't need a single change in his position. I think that he's the perfect fit for a 3-4 OLB, and there is where he will finally realize his pass rushing potential (think Shawne Merriman without the Roids and stupid looking dance). As for the other OLB spot, look no further than Arizona's own Chike Okeafor. Chike is undersized for a DE, and would make an excellent fit alongside Dansby to make for an absolutely vicious pass rush, something that has been sorely lacking for a long time.

On the inside, Gerald Hayes played great last season at ILB, and will retain the position in the 3-4. He's a thumper who can get in and shed blocks to help clog up the running game. Our other ILB comes from free agency, with the addition of veteran Donnie Edwards. Edwards has maintained this position for years, and will be the veteran presence that the young LBs require in the switch of schemes. The linebacking corps is rounded out by rushbackers Calvin Pace and Daryl Blackstock, and ILBs Monty Beisel, James Darling, and fifth round pick Desmond Bishop.

Moving to defensive backs, Adrian Wilson is the Cardinal's defensive leader and one of the best in the business. Aaron Francisco has been rumored to be taking over the FS spot, but I don't buy it. Francisco has not looked at all impressive in coverage and is better suited as a nickel back and backup to both safety positions. Robert Griffith is a great hitter who couldn't cover my grandma. Say hello to your new starting free safety Kenny "The Hammer" Hamlin. Him and good buddy Teryl Austin reunite in the desert.

While the safety position is easily fixed by the addition of Ken Hamlin, the Cardinal's cornerback position is another story. Though our corners have been much maligned, alot of this stems from the tepid pass rush up front. I'm confident that former number eight overall pick can develop into a decent number one option under the guidance of Teryl Austin. On the other hand, David Macklin is a career number three receiver, and nobody knows what's going on with Eric Green. Hopefully the addition of free agent Fred "Loveboat" Smoot can help the Cardinal's secondary up to snuff.

Note, this change isn't going to be immediate, and will probably take a year of getting used to. However, down the road, I feel that this is the best fit for a team like the Cardinals. This lineup will give us alot of hope and will helpt to solidify the Cardinals defense for years to come.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
We will use a 3-4 on occassion. As a primary defense? Forget it

Why not?

Oh, and FYI, this thread falls purely under things that I think about at work because I'm bored and have too much free time. Just looking for feedback.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,247
Reaction score
11,848
Why not?

Oh, and FYI, this thread falls purely under things that I think about at work because I'm bored and have too much free time. Just looking for feedback.

Why not?

Because in short, we do not even have 3 quality linebackers. To play the 3-4, you need at least 5. The 4 in the base, and one you can rotate in. We have 2 that can be relied upon. We are more suited to play a 5-2 defese, before a 3-4.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
Why not?

Because in short, we do not even have 3 quality linebackers. To play the 3-4, you need at least 5. The 4 in the base, and one you can rotate in. We have 2 that can be relied upon. We are more suited to play a 5-2 defese, before a 3-4.

Dansby-Hayes-Edwards-Okeafor with Darling, Blackstock, Bishop, and Pace backing them up. Seems like a good linebacking corps to me.
 

Evil Ash

Henchman Supreme
Joined
Jun 26, 2003
Posts
9,731
Reaction score
1,921
Location
On a flying cocoon
Why not?

Oh, and FYI, this thread falls purely under things that I think about at work because I'm bored and have too much free time. Just looking for feedback.

We don't have the players neccessary to run a 3-4 system all of the time. We don't even have a starter at SLB at this point.

Whis said he adjusts the scheme to the personnel. Not the other way around. So unless our personnel changes drastically we're staying primarily in the 4-3.

I do understand your boredom though. Is it March yet?
 

Shogun

Never doubt Mitch. EVER.
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Posts
4,072
Reaction score
1
I don't think Okeafor can play standing up anymore. That would just make him even less effective.
 

Skkorpion

Grey haired old Bird
LEGACY MEMBER
Supporting Member
Joined
May 9, 2002
Posts
11,026
Reaction score
5
Location
Sun City, AZ
We will use a 3-4 on occassion. As a primary defense? Forget it

That's my feeling too but Dirt may end up being right. None of us know what Whiz will prefer long term. Short term, we don't have enough of the right kind of linebackers and linemen to play the 3-4.

And, over the years, it's seemed to me that aggressive 4-3 fronts are more effective than 3-4 fronts against balanced or pass-heavy offenses. Only against run-heavy offenses is the 3-4 superior.

I don't present that as fact, just opinion.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
That's my feeling too but Dirt may end up being right. None of us know what Whiz will prefer long term. Short term, we don't have enough of the right kind of linebackers and linemen to play the 3-4.

And, over the years, it's seemed to me that aggressive 4-3 fronts are more effective than 3-4 fronts against balanced or pass-heavy offenses. Only against run-heavy offenses is the 3-4 superior.

I don't present that as fact, just opinion.

I think that 3-4 is actually better against pass defenses, because the blitzing linebacker is designed to confuse quarterbacks (why passing teams like Indy have trouble with the 3-4). The 4-3 IMO is better at the run for the simple fact that four down linemen>three down linemen. That said, the scheme doesn't matter all that much, as the defense can be tailored against either the run or the pass.

Personally, I think that a 3-4 is a better fit for our team because it's the better scheme for blitzing. And with our high powered offense, our defense whould primarily be designed for applying pressure (think San Diego).
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,247
Reaction score
11,848
Dansby-Hayes-Edwards-Okeafor with Darling, Blackstock, Bishop, and Pace backing them up. Seems like a good linebacking corps to me.

That is where we differ. I feel that that core of linebackers is in the lower end, when comparing them with the rest of the league.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
We don't have the players neccessary to run a 3-4 system all of the time. We don't even have a starter at SLB at this point.

Whis said he adjusts the scheme to the personnel. Not the other way around. So unless our personnel changes drastically we're staying primarily in the 4-3.

I do understand your boredom though. Is it March yet?

I don't think that at the beginning of the year we'll be running the 3-4 all the time, but we'll definitely play more and more snaps with that look. However, with the personell decisions that I outlined, I think that we could make a relatively smooth transition to the 3-4 and have it be our base defense in 2008.

And yeah, I'm almost bored enough to actually *gasp* work. Almost.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,334
Reaction score
29,666
Location
Gilbert, AZ
The 3-4 doesn't work as a base package because our NT can only play 25 downs a game (Watson) and we only have one 3-4 DE (Clancy). If you try and put Dockett in a two-gap situation, he's going to quit on you. Cooper, Lewis, and Dockett are all too small to be 3-4 DEs.

Atlanta tried to run a small/blitzing 3-4 when they had Wade Phillips and it was an abject failure. They were horrible against the run and that's all teams did against them. Dan Reeves was fired that year.

Just because we don't have many good OLBs doesn't mean that we should just convert our DEs into them. You have to build personnel for a 3-4 defense over two or three offseasons, like Dallas did. San Francisco's been trying to convert to a 3-4 for the past three seasons and still have to go back to a 4-3 anytime there's in injury.
 

Mulli

...
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Posts
52,529
Reaction score
4,601
Location
Generational
The 3-4 doesn't work as a base package because our NT can only play 25 downs a game (Watson) and we only have one 3-4 DE (Clancy). If you try and put Dockett in a two-gap situation, he's going to quit on you. Cooper, Lewis, and Dockett are all too small to be 3-4 DEs.

Atlanta tried to run a small/blitzing 3-4 when they had Wade Phillips and it was an abject failure. They were horrible against the run and that's all teams did against them. Dan Reeves was fired that year.

Just because we don't have many good OLBs doesn't mean that we should just convert our DEs into them.
Yep, pretty sure Whis of AZ has said the Cards don't have the right players to switch to the 3-4 this year.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
The 3-4 doesn't work as a base package because our NT can only play 25 downs a game (Watson) and we only have one 3-4 DE (Clancy). If you try and put Dockett in a two-gap situation, he's going to quit on you. Cooper, Lewis, and Dockett are all too small to be 3-4 DEs.

Atlanta tried to run a small/blitzing 3-4 when they had Wade Phillips and it was an abject failure. They were horrible against the run and that's all teams did against them. Dan Reeves was fired that year.

Just because we don't have many good OLBs doesn't mean that we should just convert our DEs into them. You have to build personnel for a 3-4 defense over two or three offseasons, like Dallas did. San Francisco's been trying to convert to a 3-4 for the past three seasons and still have to go back to a 4-3 anytime there's in injury.

I know that Watson can only play 30 or so downs again, hence why he's splitting time with Tank Tyler. Dockett, at 290, is plenty big to play a 3-4 DE and Alan Branch, our other DE, might actually have to drop ten pounds to play it.

I recognize that there will be a period where we transition between the two systems (as outlined in the original post). This isn't one of those immediate fixes, just one of those things that we should consider for the future of the team.
 

Mulli

...
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Posts
52,529
Reaction score
4,601
Location
Generational
Just so long as Garth Jax is not involved, I wouldn't mind mixing in 3-4 a bit more.
 

Goldfield

Formally known as BEERZ
Joined
Sep 13, 2002
Posts
10,499
Reaction score
2,303
Location
ASFN
I love the 3-4


I think we have some players that would do well in a 3-4, but I also think we would need to bring in alot of LB's to make it work. I am all for it.

Draft Branch, move Dockett to DE, rotate Watson & Clancey at DT.
 
OP
OP
O

OldDirtMcGirt

Registered User
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,255
Reaction score
0
I love the 3-4


I think we have some players that would do well in a 3-4, but I also think we would need to bring in alot of LB's to make it work. I am all for it.

Draft Branch, move Dockett to DE, rotate Watson & Clancey at DT.

The big problem is I don't see where Clancy fits in the 3-4. He'll have to take a reduced role (NT on obvious passing situations), because there's no way he could command doulbe teams and physically hold up. Here's the personnel that we could get that would make it work:

1. Donnie Edwards (free agency) ILB
2. Alan Branch (round one) DE
3. DeMarcus "Tank" Tyler (round two) NT
4. Dan "Buzz" Bazuin (round three) OLB
5. Michael Johnson (round four) FS
6. Desmond Bishop (round five) ILB

Although it's unlickely we spend almost all of our draft picks on defense, that's a pretty beastly lineup if you ask me.
 

lobo

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Posts
3,310
Reaction score
230
Location
Inverness, Il
That's my feeling too but Dirt may end up being right. None of us know what Whiz will prefer long term. Short term, we don't have enough of the right kind of linebackers and linemen to play the 3-4.

Not that I am the "all knowing" but you are 100% correct. We do not have the personnel to run a whole lot of 3/4. However I think we will see it from time to time. We do have a few guys who would excel in that scheme. Dockett, Hayes, Dansby would be 3/4 standouts.
 

Gandhi

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
2,003
Reaction score
2,822
Location
Denmark
I think it was 2006 up until a couple months ago. Not sure what year it right now.

I think it depends on what country you are in.

The dogs year or something. Gotta love it. Or something like that.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
552,443
Posts
5,399,074
Members
6,313
Latest member
50 year card fan
Top