There are 144 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

98 & 99 @ DE!

Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Tman:
You are misguided in the fact that you went off on a tangent and are trying to make a case for us not using the "hybrid" system and instead to use the base 3-4. I totally respect your opinion and you are completely right the hybrid system was wack and we ARE going to be using a base 3-4. That has been well publisized (sp?).

Thanks for your points. The only tangent I went off on though is that I didn't see how that lineup would be effective in passing situations and how it didn't play to the strengths of Lawson & Haralson and how it is a predictable defense to combat and how it was ineffective last year - and how scheme is just as important as the players who play in it. I'm happy to see us going with a base 3-4 despite not having any dominant full-time (or unproven) OLB's and NT. But we played a very vanilla and predictable 3-4 last year too which, I'm hoping, will not be the case this year.

Originally posted by Tman:
If you read what I originally posted they were working on thier "NICKEL" package not a "hybrid" base. Which will be used in passing situations. All teams use some form of a nickel package and we were practicing ours. You wouldnt want to stay in a base 3-4 if the opposing team was at 3rd and 10 with 3 or 4 wrs would you? So who better to line our front 4 with Then Lawson, Smith, Balmer (if he comes around) and Haralson?


This is true but a draw, off-tackle run (esp. towards Lawson), any pass in the 5-15 yard range, crossing pattern, etc. will destroy this defense. An inside rush might work too as both Smith & Balmer can be taken out easier inside with the center and two guards rather then having Smith on the outside where he can move and fight through 1, sometimes 2 blockers. I'd probably use a three-man front (since they are in a 3rd and long set) and pull Lawson and Haralson off the LOS...more of a base 3-4 but also walking your safety up to the LOS so you have no idea who is going to blitz...Lawson, Haralson, Willis/Spikes, Lewis, CB blitz? I'd ask the CB's to also play tight at the LOS and be very physical. The tighter they are, the easier it is to throw off the timing of the WR and run a CB blitz off of.

Sure, if they run 4+ WR's, we'd have to combat that using more corners but it doesn't mean you have to use a 4-man front. A 4-man front is predictable and leaves the middle of field wide open.

Originally posted by Tman:
So thinking back on the wonderful creation of the hybrid and an earlier posters reference to the "BIG NICKEL" (which made me laugh by the way). It was used pretty extensively against the seahawks (1st game) and the saints. And if I remember right, correct me if im wrong, we used 4 DLs, 2 LBs, 2 Cbs and 3 Safeties. 3 safeties giving it the BIG denomonation. Man did that get burned, the saints game was brutal.


No doubt, we got destroyed mostly with this defense which was exactly my point to begin with.

And NCommand was right...damn him (J/K)!!!! Hybrid Mayhem went down in serious flames!!!!!


[ Edited by ninertico on Jun 11, 2009 at 10:33:16 ]
Originally posted by ninertico:
And NCommand was right...damn him (J/K)!!!! Hybrid Mayhem went down in serious flames!!!!!

LOL...it only happens once in a while! I was very happy to see Manusky/Singletary provide a base-defense and allow everyone to know what their roles are going forward...a big move from Nolan who wanted more generalists rather then specialists. That's a huge difference!
Originally posted by NCommand:
Not really. Haralson and Lawson need to be blitzing from a standup position off the LOS and with a running start - not with their hands down as psuedo DE's. Both would get man-handled by OT's one-on-one right off the line and I'm not sure how effective the inside would be against the inside rush. Is this another 4-2-5 lineup? AKA "hybrid defense?" Not only that, that lineup takes ALL unpredictability away. You basically give the o-line plenty of time to call out assignments. Obviously the two pseudo DE's are going to rush, there's only 2 LB's (middle of the field is wide open esp. off the tackles) and you probably don't want to pass in the 15+ range given there are 5 DB's. Ahhhh, shades of Nolan!

A running start? You must be talking about Arena league football. When have you seen an OLB get a running start? Ahhhhh, shades of someone who has no idea what they are talking about!
Originally posted by dublniklz:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Not really. Haralson and Lawson need to be blitzing from a standup position off the LOS and with a running start - not with their hands down as psuedo DE's. Both would get man-handled by OT's one-on-one right off the line and I'm not sure how effective the inside would be against the inside rush. Is this another 4-2-5 lineup? AKA "hybrid defense?" Not only that, that lineup takes ALL unpredictability away. You basically give the o-line plenty of time to call out assignments. Obviously the two pseudo DE's are going to rush, there's only 2 LB's (middle of the field is wide open esp. off the tackles) and you probably don't want to pass in the 15+ range given there are 5 DB's. Ahhhh, shades of Nolan!

A running start? You must be talking about Arena league football. When have you seen an OLB get a running start? Ahhhhh, shades of someone who has no idea what they are talking about!

Are you kidding me? Merriman and all the great OLB's stand off the LOS, move back and forth behind the LOS before the snap (looking for the gaps and weaknesses on the OL) and explode when the ball is snapped. Sometimes, yes, they are standing up at the LOS as a psudeo DE and rush from there but these guys are most effective when they get that extra step - this is when they get a full head of steam and either bull rush the OT's back into the QB or sprint right around them.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by dublniklz:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Not really. Haralson and Lawson need to be blitzing from a standup position off the LOS and with a running start - not with their hands down as psuedo DE's. Both would get man-handled by OT's one-on-one right off the line and I'm not sure how effective the inside would be against the inside rush. Is this another 4-2-5 lineup? AKA "hybrid defense?" Not only that, that lineup takes ALL unpredictability away. You basically give the o-line plenty of time to call out assignments. Obviously the two pseudo DE's are going to rush, there's only 2 LB's (middle of the field is wide open esp. off the tackles) and you probably don't want to pass in the 15+ range given there are 5 DB's. Ahhhh, shades of Nolan!

A running start? You must be talking about Arena league football. When have you seen an OLB get a running start? Ahhhhh, shades of someone who has no idea what they are talking about!

Are you kidding me? Merriman and all the great OLB's stand off the LOS, move back and forth behind the LOS before the snap (looking for the gaps and weaknesses on the OL) and explode when the ball is snapped. Sometimes, yes, they are standing up at the LOS as a psudeo DE and rush from there but these guys are most effective when they get that extra step - this is when they get a full head of steam and either bull rush the OT's back into the QB or sprint right around them.

Really? So it's that easy? You just move around a bit and then you can bull rush the tackle or sprint right around them? Man, I wonder why everyone in the league hasn't figured that out yet.
Originally posted by dublniklz:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by dublniklz:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Not really. Haralson and Lawson need to be blitzing from a standup position off the LOS and with a running start - not with their hands down as psuedo DE's. Both would get man-handled by OT's one-on-one right off the line and I'm not sure how effective the inside would be against the inside rush. Is this another 4-2-5 lineup? AKA "hybrid defense?" Not only that, that lineup takes ALL unpredictability away. You basically give the o-line plenty of time to call out assignments. Obviously the two pseudo DE's are going to rush, there's only 2 LB's (middle of the field is wide open esp. off the tackles) and you probably don't want to pass in the 15+ range given there are 5 DB's. Ahhhh, shades of Nolan!

A running start? You must be talking about Arena league football. When have you seen an OLB get a running start? Ahhhhh, shades of someone who has no idea what they are talking about!

Are you kidding me? Merriman and all the great OLB's stand off the LOS, move back and forth behind the LOS before the snap (looking for the gaps and weaknesses on the OL) and explode when the ball is snapped. Sometimes, yes, they are standing up at the LOS as a psudeo DE and rush from there but these guys are most effective when they get that extra step - this is when they get a full head of steam and either bull rush the OT's back into the QB or sprint right around them.

Really? So it's that easy? You just move around a bit and then you can bull rush the tackle or sprint right around them? Man, I wonder why everyone in the league hasn't figured that out yet.

My point is that WE don't do that...we stick Haralson, Lawson/Green/TBC on the LOS from the same two predictable, psuedo-DE spots, standing up. Essentially, you have a 5-man line with: SAM - LDE - NT - RDE - WILL

This is very predictable and easy for the o-line to block b/c they KNOW who's rushing and from where. The good 3-4 teams disguise the blitzes and switch OLB's, rush them from different spots, use the inside LB's to blitz, use one of the OLB's up at the LOS and the other off, both on the LOS at the same time, both off, one rushes and one drops back into coverage, etc. In short, "where" the blitz comes from is totally unpredictable and keeps the offense off-balance. When you add in a safety that too, can also blitz, it makes it even more difficult for offense to call the correct line-block...CB blitzes? These work so often b/c the line is so occupied with where the rush "might" come from they forget about the corner. But it's simple physics...if an OLB can get a running start, it's much easier for him to get leverage under an OT and move him back or rush around him to the QB. He also has a better visual of the QB and where he is going as opposed to starting at the LOS where a first qucik move is most important over strength and leverage. This is what ALL good 3-4 teams do. They put their pass rushers in position to be most successful and disguise the blitzes - organized chaos, if you will.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by ninertico:
And NCommand was right...damn him (J/K)!!!! Hybrid Mayhem went down in serious flames!!!!!

LOL...it only happens once in a while! I was very happy to see Manusky/Singletary provide a base-defense and allow everyone to know what their roles are going forward...a big move from Nolan who wanted more generalists rather then specialists. That's a huge difference!

  • Tman
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,312
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Tman:
You are misguided in the fact that you went off on a tangent and are trying to make a case for us not using the "hybrid" system and instead to use the base 3-4. I totally respect your opinion and you are completely right the hybrid system was wack and we ARE going to be using a base 3-4. That has been well publisized (sp?).

Thanks for your points. The only tangent I went off on though is that I didn't see how that lineup would be effective in passing situations and how it didn't play to the strengths of Lawson & Haralson and how it is a predictable defense to combat and how it was ineffective last year - and how scheme is just as important as the players who play in it. I'm happy to see us going with a base 3-4 despite not having any dominant full-time (or unproven) OLB's and NT. But we played a very vanilla and predictable 3-4 last year too which, I'm hoping, will not be the case this year.

Originally posted by Tman:
If you read what I originally posted they were working on thier "NICKEL" package not a "hybrid" base. Which will be used in passing situations. All teams use some form of a nickel package and we were practicing ours. You wouldnt want to stay in a base 3-4 if the opposing team was at 3rd and 10 with 3 or 4 wrs would you? So who better to line our front 4 with Then Lawson, Smith, Balmer (if he comes around) and Haralson?


This is true but a draw, off-tackle run (esp. towards Lawson), any pass in the 5-15 yard range, crossing pattern, etc. will destroy this defense. An inside rush might work too as both Smith & Balmer can be taken out easier inside with the center and two guards rather then having Smith on the outside where he can move and fight through 1, sometimes 2 blockers. I'd probably use a three-man front (since they are in a 3rd and long set) and pull Lawson and Haralson off the LOS...more of a base 3-4 but also walking your safety up to the LOS so you have no idea who is going to blitz...Lawson, Haralson, Willis/Spikes, Lewis, CB blitz? I'd ask the CB's to also play tight at the LOS and be very physical. The tighter they are, the easier it is to throw off the timing of the WR and run a CB blitz off of.

Sure, if they run 4+ WR's, we'd have to combat that using more corners but it doesn't mean you have to use a 4-man front. A 4-man front is predictable and leaves the middle of field wide open.

Originally posted by Tman:
So thinking back on the wonderful creation of the hybrid and an earlier posters reference to the "BIG NICKEL" (which made me laugh by the way). It was used pretty extensively against the seahawks (1st game) and the saints. And if I remember right, correct me if im wrong, we used 4 DLs, 2 LBs, 2 Cbs and 3 Safeties. 3 safeties giving it the BIG denomonation. Man did that get burned, the saints game was brutal.


No doubt, we got destroyed mostly with this defense which was exactly my point to begin with.

awfully condisending......

Ok Ncommand, please reread what my original post was. I simply was excited at the personel Manusky was putting on the field while they were PRACTICING ONE of thier NICKEL formations. I am sure that Manusky is just as knowledgeable about football and especially defensive formations as you are.

I am pretty sure he is an NFL coach and knows how to put his pieces in the right place, but hey maybe you can give him a call sometime and get him up to speed on anything he missed.

I realize there are MANY different formations and personel packages you can use with any particular defense.

Anybody who has played madden more then twice knows that

So just like you said you dont want to be to predictable so why not have a 4 man front thrown in there to switch it up a little, along with 3 man, 5 man, 2 man, Dime package, quarter packages, goal line, 34 base, over, under, man, zone and everything else I dont know about.

Or is Manusky a psuedo Defensive coordinator?

Originally posted by Tman:
awfully condisending......

Ok Ncommand, please reread what my original post was. I simply was excited at the personel Manusky was putting on the field while they were PRACTICING ONE of thier NICKEL formations. I am sure that Manusky is just as knowledgeable about football and especially defensive formations as you are.

I am pretty sure he is an NFL coach and knows how to put his pieces in the right place, but hey maybe you can give him a call sometime and get him up to speed on anything he missed.

I realize there are MANY different formations and personel packages you can use with any particular defense.

Anybody who has played madden more then twice knows that

So just like you said you dont want to be to predictable so why not have a 4 man front thrown in there to switch it up a little, along with 3 man, 5 man, 2 man, Dime package, quarter packages, goal line, 34 base, over, under, man, zone and everything else I dont know about.

Or is Manusky a psuedo Defensive coordinator?


LOL...sorry you took it that way. I like your point though in changing up the fronts and who knows, this is the time to experiement, it may become a successful front. I just saw some holes in it, that's all and I am cautiously optimistic it's a good front to employ. I have tremendous faith in Manusky. In fact, I was one of his earliest fans on this board and felt Nowin really held him back (big time). When he and Singletary took over the defense, I saw a vanilla 3-4 but understood it given it was a base 3-4 and designed to simplify things for the defense going forward with a stronger focuson knowing their roles. This season, my hope is, now that the defense is defined as well as the startingg positons and roles, I'd like to see Manusky employ a REAL 3-4 and turn 'em loose (esp. himself). I truly hope Mike doesn't hold him back like Nowin did! And next year, I hope, for the first time, there will be a strong focus on getting a true NT, LDE and pass rushing OLB.
Where are all the Lawson fan boys now????????

Some of us saw this garbage pass rush coming along time ago........
Originally posted by AKfanster:
Where are all the Lawson fan boys now????????

Some of us saw this garbage pass rush coming along time ago........

after Takeo Spikes retires.......I say we go back to the 4-3

Haralson, Willis, Lawson
McDonald, Ice, Franklin, Justin Smith

with Balmer thrown in there somewhere.

let McDonald and Justin Smith really rush the passer.

with the occasional Manny, Haralson, Willis blitzes
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by AKfanster:
Where are all the Lawson fan boys now????????

Some of us saw this garbage pass rush coming along time ago........

after Takeo Spikes retires.......I say we go back to the 4-3

Haralson, Willis, Lawson
McDonald, Ice, Franklin, Justin Smith

with Balmer thrown in there somewhere.

let McDonald and Justin Smith really rush the passer.

with the occasional Manny, Haralson, Willis blitzes



Lawson is clearly not an effective 3-4 OLB. He needs to be replaced ASAP or the pass rush will never be that good.
Changing the D to 4-3 seems a little extreme, I think we just need to add a better pass rushing OLB.
What's the f*cking point arguing about it now?

Lawson is still a good player but obviously so far it's not looking like having him rush the passer more often will produce much of anything.

Can't do anything about this season now without overreacting.

We have 2 first round picks in a deep pass rusher draft next year. Let's just hope we can create enough pass rush with blitzes to get through this season as best as we can then hope we can land a top pass rusher or two in the draft/free agency.
Originally posted by AKfanster:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by AKfanster:
Where are all the Lawson fan boys now????????

Some of us saw this garbage pass rush coming along time ago........

after Takeo Spikes retires.......I say we go back to the 4-3

Haralson, Willis, Lawson
McDonald, Ice, Franklin, Justin Smith

with Balmer thrown in there somewhere.

let McDonald and Justin Smith really rush the passer.

with the occasional Manny, Haralson, Willis blitzes



Lawson is clearly not an effective 3-4 OLB. He needs to be replaced ASAP or the pass rush will never be that good.
Changing the D to 4-3 seems a little extreme, I think we just need to add a better pass rushing OLB.

Next years draft is rumored to be loaded into the 2nd round with quality pass rushers.