Cards' D: 3-4/4-3 mix?

[Praxis]

Hey, everyone. New poster here. With the new off-season signings and the Bowles departure I was wondering: Are the Cardinals moving toward a mixture of 3-4 and 4-3 configurations in 2015?

 

[Shane]

No more then they have in the past.. We are a base 3-4 thats not going to change

 

[Praxis]

Cool, I was just thinking they might be thinking of moving toward more 4-3 since Dan Williams is now a Raider. I hope Jim Bettcher gets creative with a lot of hybrid looks.

 

[Mitch]

Cool, I was just thinking they might be thinking of moving toward more 4-3 since Dan Williams is now a Raider. I hope Jim Bettcher gets creative with a lot of hybrid looks.

Welcome, Praxis! The Cardinals actually started a few games last year in a 4 man front and experimented with it quite a bit. If they were getting run on they would switch to the 3-4. It's one of the reasons why Dan Williams garnered only 37% of the snaps. Therefore your question has real merit.

 

[Jetstream Green]

Welcome, Praxis! The Cardinals actually started a few games last year in a 4 man front and experimented with it quite a bit. If they were getting run on they would switch to the 3-4. It's one of the reasons why Dan Williams garnered only 37% of the snaps. Therefore your question has real merit.

You mean they would switch to a 4-3 as they did for the Dallas game to contain Murray

 

[Stout]

Welcome to the board. I'll have a double order of scotch eggs, Guinness stew, and of course a tall pint

 

[Shane]

Welcome to the board. I'll have a double order of scotch eggs, Guinness stew, and of course a tall pint

I love scotch eggs

 

[Finito]

It's a base 3-4 hybrid

We move to other looks out of need. It's been stated a million times were a 3-4 by coaching I have no idea why people here think we're moving to a 4-3

 

[kerouac9]

No more then they have in the past.. We are a base 3-4 thats not going to change

Based on what? Because looking at current personnel moves, that doesn't seem to be the case.

It's a base 3-4 hybrid

We move to other looks out of need. It's been stated a million times were a 3-4 by coaching I have no idea why people here think we're moving to a 4-3

That was with Bowles. I haven't heard anything from Bettcher one way or another. But letting your Nose Tackle walk because you didn't feel like you needed him full time is a pretty good way to indicate that you don't need to use a nose tackle so much these days.

I'm interested to see when the Football Outsiders Almanac comes out in June or July how often we really played in a 3-4 base D last year.

 

[Assface]

Based on what? Because looking at current personnel moves, that doesn't seem to be the case.



That was with Bowles. I haven't heard anything from Bettcher one way or another. But letting your Nose Tackle walk because you didn't feel like you needed him full time is a pretty good way to indicate that you don't need to use a nose tackle so much these days.

I'm interested to see when the Football Outsiders Almanac comes out in June or July how often we really played in a 3-4 base D last year.

I seem to recall us being a 3-4 defense in name only last year. I don't really see the logic in running a LB based defense when that is by far our weakest position group. Personally, I think CC as a 4-3 LDE gets 10+ sacks.

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

I would like to see more of a 2-5 D. Get 2 bohemoth DTs and 5 fast hard hitting LBs, any or all of which could alternate rushing the passer on any given down. That would be fun to see if you had the premium players to make it work. The OL would never know who, when, or where the pass rush was coming from down to down.

 

[Praxis]

Our pass rush should be much, much better regardless of who lines up where. I have no idea what Bettcher's philosophy is, but there's a good chance our defense is better than it was over the first half of last season.

 

[kerouac9]

I seem to recall us being a 3-4 defense in name only last year. I don't really see the logic in running a LB based defense when that is by far our weakest position group. Personally, I think CC as a 4-3 LDE gets 10+ sacks.

I don't think that's true--but I'm interested to see the data on it.

I would like to see more of a 2-5 D. Get 2 bohemoth DTs and 5 fast hard hitting LBs, any or all of which could alternate rushing the passer on any given down. That would be fun to see if you had the premium players to make it work. The OL would never know who, when, or where the pass rush was coming from down to down.

Horton ran a 2-4-5 with Wilson in the Box all the time, and teams would just run the ball. 3rd and 8 was an easy first down. Obviously, we're not stocking up on behemoth DTs--we're stocking up on one-gap DTs.

Our pass rush should be much, much better regardless of who lines up where. I have no idea what Bettcher's philosophy is, but there's a good chance our defense is better than it was over the first half of last season.

I'm skeptical. Quick DTs work well against bigger, slower guards, but not so much against more nimble offensive tackles.