The Jets FO/CS should be applauded for the job done in flipping personnel from a team ill-fit to the scheme the coaches want to run. Players like Hobson and Vilma were not close to being ideal fits in the 34 defense and at times, frankly, terrible. Ditto on Dewayne Robertson. None of these players were drafted to play in the 34, and all were terrible in it. Jon Vilma's regression in particular, that we all saw during his last two years in G&W was truly pathetic. He was exposed to being a truly limited player that actually could not play in the 34 scheme, because his history with the 43 and the style he played derived from that system were ingrained over the number of years from his high school days in Coral Gables all the way through his UM career, and ultimately as a NYJ, where he became a rookie team MVP and Pro Bowl player. Vilma is the type of player that needed open space to range from sideline to sideline making tackles. He tried to hack in the 34 but couldn't. In the same way he went in when Sam Cowart went down, David Harris went in when Vilma went down. Oh, the karma. The karma. The karma is that now, even as we have a roster with an immeasurably greater match to scheme and organizational strategy, specifically with regard to the 34 and the specific positions on the roster that have been turned over (Pace/Gholston for Hobson; Harris for Vilma; and Jenkins for Robertson), now, even as the 34 NYJ defense looks stronger, so does its permutability back into...tada...the 43. Mangini covets pliancy and versatility. His flex defense has always been an impure 34. We have seen plenty of 43 looks even if we haven't actually recognized them, or want to admit it. Some people have estimated that Mangini runs a 43 to a 34 at about a 1:1 ratio, or about 50% of the time. I wouldn't make such a liberal estimation -- I don't think it is exactly that equal, but I would think that it is at the most conservative 33-40% of the time. And the new personnel is just plain better on both fronts which will allow Mangini and Sutton greater latitude in their defensive calls. With David Harris, you have a player that has experience in the flex defense from his Michigan days. Michigan has played a flex defense during his time there, in which Harris has played both the 43 and the 34. He is just as fast as Vilma, sideline to sideline, and more effective with garbage at his feet and better at dealing with guards in his face. With a NT or two DTs in from if him, it really doesn't matter. That wasn't the case with Vilma. In Calvin Pace and especially with Vernon Gholston and Brian Thomas, we have two OLB that have just as much viability in a 43 at DE, and a third with potential viability. Pace is said to have found his groove in the 34, but his background and his physique includes the ability to play the 43. While Thomas may have been able to pull it off, Vic Hobson could never ever do that. Now, from either side, the defense can expand or contract its OLB/DE in or out. ------------Harris---Barton------------ Hobson------------------------Thomas --------Coleman--DWR---Ellis---------- With Kris Jenkins, we have a player that made the Pro Bowl -- the Pro Bowl! -- more than once, at 43 DT. Not only is Jenkins the 34 NT that everyone envisions him as, but he is an upgrade over Robertson at the 43 one gap, gap shooting, up the field, penetrating position... Think about that. It's just bloody amazing. The defense has become better on two fronts. It has become more flexible. It has become a better match between both the 34 scheme and personnel by a molting of players that were bad fits and by acquisition of players that are a better fit, and it's become a better defense if we need to play a standard 43. Pace----------Harris--------Barton Gholston-Coleman--Jenkins--Ellis Barton is a natural 43 OLB. Pace is a a player accustomed to dropping into coverage and is quick enough to play 43 OLB. And Coleman, 6'5" 295 is big enough to play 43 DT. He played DT with the Cowboys in their nickel sets in 2006, and the KC Chiefs were said to be interested in his services the year we picked him up. The position he'd have played for Herm: 43 DT. Plug Thomas in for Pace or Gholston and use any combo of two of those three, and also consider Bowens, Pouha, Devito, Kareem Brown, and Mosley at the various other LB/DL positions, and voila, you have a truly flex defense. A better 34 base. A better 43 base. And a better permutability from either into the other if the defensive captain audibles for it. Here it is again the starting 43 base: Pace-----------Harris--------Barton Gholston--Coleman--Jenkins--Ellis or Pace----------Harris--------Barton Gholston-Pouha--Jenkins--Ellis or Pace----------Harris--------Barton Gholston--Mosley--Jenkins--Ellis etc
Darth, you seem to be making a fairly simple point, but writing as if it is rocket science. You may be putting people off by confronting them with such a mass of text. Shorter, pithier posts tend to get better responses.
Whether it's a lot of words or not, Darth, I think yours is a good post. The mobility and intelligence of these bigger guys renders them more flexible. Mangini and Sutton wish to run a hybrid 3-4 / 4-3 defense that seeks to confuse and freeze the offense, in my opinion. Vilma couldn't cut it because he wasn't strong enough to fight off the OL coming after him. We'll never know if a stouter DL would have made Vilma more effective, though. It is hard to project how this current mix of folks will pan out under the Mangini / Sutton scheme. We haven't seen them "in harm's way" so the jury's still out. But I agree that this new personnel mix is more exciting and has possibility.
Darth, your post was perfect. i like how you explained that 1) we improved BOTH the 34 AND 43, and 2) mangini loves to mix it up, running both fronts with different combos of players (remember ellis playing OLB to get more run stopping beef?). belichick also runs about 50-50 34 43. our first game last year he ran 100% 43 at us. nice post. write another post for the offensive side of the ball. with new adds for 2008 like miller, stucky, keller, woody, & feneca it should be fun to write. and read!
I hope we forget avout that hybrid Idea and use every minute of practice to make the 34 as strong and as variable as possible. The D has to be on top of it?s play week 1 not midseason, as it was the last couple of years. We should perfect your bread and butter Defense, before we think about implementing a second sceme.
When I saw the title of this thread, I really thought Darth Vader was gonna list out 43 different possibilities. Now I'm a little disappointed . . .
Sorry, I'll try that next time. i've always had that problem... thanx for the advice. i wrote something up about keller not long ago. but thanx and when I get some time, I'll try some of those things. I think, actually, this is a defense could play the Tampa 2 with great success. You have players like Miller and Lowery that while imperfect man cbs, could excel in zone. Maybe I'll write one for the secondary next.
Why would Mangini abandon his main defensive philosophy in his third year? People the past 2 seasons have been crying because 'we are running a 3-4 with 4-3 personnel' which was far from the truth. We finally have the guys in place that can play in the 4-3 as well as the 3-4 effectively, this would be the worst time possible to abandon the hybrid.
Mangini and Sutton DO NOT run a pure 3-4, never have, and won't ever probably. This is the reason behind all the defensive personnel changes. As Darth points out, the hybrid is being fed more versatile athletes. The hybrid will succeed in this way, in my opinion.
you guys make good points. in the upcoming three years if our players stay healthy and productive, we will see the best PURE 43 defense our team has fielded in at least 10 years. I still think Gholston's best position may be 43 d. end in the NFL. Just coming up frield.
I think I pointed this out earlier: how about Pace in ILB for 3-4? Then, with same personnel of Gholston/Pace/Harris/Thomas - Coleman/Jenkins/Ellis, you get either: Gholston - Pace - Harris - Thomas Coleman - Jenkins - Ellis Or... Pace - Harris - Thomas Gholston - Coleman - Jenkins - Ellis The opposing O won't even know what kind of alignment it is supposed to expect until it sees the alignment at the snap. Cool, eh?
I thought something like that, too. When writing about defensive formations, hyphens should be used. Hyphens are not used if talking about defenses that were named for a player's uniform number (see Miami's 53 Defense of the early 1970s; name came from Bob Matheson's jersey number and Chicago's 46 Defense, so named for the uniform number of Doug Plank).
