Exactly! That's why I think this whole 34 vs. 43 issue is overblown. We do BOTH, and need to to have the most options available in order to better prepare for--and surprise--opponents. The value of implementing the 34 is that it forces the opponent to do twice the prepararation for our D. I agree that our personnel last year was better suited for the 43, but that will improve with new personnel that are added through the draft and FA. In the end we will be much more formidable because of our versatility.
I believe the best defense is no label at all. Giving multiple looks, blitzing from various areas, unique coverage schemes, and various gap assignments are what make a defense successful schematically. We saw some of that last season after the bye week, and I believe we'll see more of that this year. Perhaps Mangini does indeed like to run a base 3-4, but we did see many different looks, and I believe that is the right thing to do. I also think that Vilma and especially D rob, really started to come around by season's end. D rob went from a liability the first 4 games of the year, to our best player in the front 7. Adding more versatile players in the upcoming draft should only make our schemes more unique and also make us more successful.
What were the stats on the run defense when Edwards first switched to the Tampa 2 from Parcells' and Groh's 3-4? The stats you are quoting are from a defense that had experience with each other and the system. As I remember 03-04 defense was terrible against the run, so bad that we couldn't stop an opening drive and we let the Raiders score on their first drive without throwing a single pass against us (The RB pool was Charlie Garner/Tyrone Wheately/Justin Fargas). 1)There's always going to be a bit of a struggle in transition from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and visa versa. 2)Wait for the fa period and draft to be over with before making the argument to that we do not have the personnelle to run the 3-4. There's still time to sign, trade for, and draft tallent that will better suit the 3-4 scheme that the coaching staff is looking for. 3)With some experience under their belt the team should be a little more adept in playing the 3-4 scheme. As Hydro noted there was an improvement in the defense as the year progressed and I can only see that continuing baring any major injuries.
an interesting post, but with the $25 extension given to Bryan Thomas, it shows the FO and coach want the 3-4.
The difference between the 3-4 and the 4-3 is primarily one of personell. You need a DE who can play LB or an LB who can play on the D line. A lot of the time the 3-4 looks like the 4-3 with Thomas at the line whether standing or with his hand down. When he is at the line as a Rush End that puts Vilma at one OLB, Barton at ILB, and Hobson at the other OLB with Ellis, DRob, and Coleman on the the line as traditional D Linemen. If you are looking for the Jets to line up with just 3 on the line and 4 standing LBs then you wont see it very often. Thats not how the 3-4 works. If it did it would be as static and inflexible as the 4-3. Nothing the Jets have done this off season indicates a shift from the the 3-4. They are paying Thomas a big salary to be that hybrid DE/LB and Coleman was a DE in a 3-4 at Dallas. The 3-4 works. Everyone says you should build your D around your personell which makes sense if your goals are short term. If they are long term you install the D you think is best and build the personell to run it. I heard a rumor over on another board that the Jets were thinking on trading for a DE/DT from Tennessee. If they make this deal I wont be surprised to see DRob get traded so the Jets can move up in the draft to get an OLB to replace Hobson after next season or an RT.
What's the deal with Rashad Moore. I've seen him listed some places as a RFA. Is he signed for next year?
