Ryan Kerrigan, DE, Purdue

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

But what you don't understand is that we don't need to switch back to a 4-3 if we selected Kerrigan. He can transition to OLB in our system. He played end at Purdue but also played at OLB when they used three down linemen.

I said it early, if Parys Haralson can transition to OLB for us, Kerrigan should be able to, especially since he has some experience at standing and rushing.

I have no problem with Kerrigan at OLB, that post was in response to some dude saying we have perfect players for a 4-3.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

But what you don't understand is that we don't need to switch back to a 4-3 if we selected Kerrigan. He can transition to OLB in our system. He played end at Purdue but also played at OLB when they used three down linemen.

I said it early, if Parys Haralson can transition to OLB for us, Kerrigan should be able to, especially since he has some experience at standing and rushing.

I have no problem with Kerrigan at OLB, that post was in response to some dude saying we have perfect players for a 4-3.

Oh ok, my mistake.

Another good thing for Kerrigan is that he could be an every down player. In passing situations, he can line up at end next to Justin Smith.

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

But what you don't understand is that we don't need to switch back to a 4-3 if we selected Kerrigan. He can transition to OLB in our system. He played end at Purdue but also played at OLB when they used three down linemen.

I said it early, if Parys Haralson can transition to OLB for us, Kerrigan should be able to, especially since he has some experience at standing and rushing.

I have no problem with Kerrigan at OLB, that post was in response to some dude saying we have perfect players for a 4-3.

Oh ok, my mistake.

Another good thing for Kerrigan is that he could be an every down player. In passing situations, he can line up at end next to Justin Smith.

NP. I do think we need to address the OLB position but is it our most pressing need?

I think if we're in a position to take someone like Prince or Allen Bailey or even a QB we might go there before OLB and pick one up later. I hope Laboy is back he was solid as a rusher.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

But what you don't understand is that we don't need to switch back to a 4-3 if we selected Kerrigan. He can transition to OLB in our system. He played end at Purdue but also played at OLB when they used three down linemen.

I said it early, if Parys Haralson can transition to OLB for us, Kerrigan should be able to, especially since he has some experience at standing and rushing.

I have no problem with Kerrigan at OLB, that post was in response to some dude saying we have perfect players for a 4-3.

Oh ok, my mistake.

Another good thing for Kerrigan is that he could be an every down player. In passing situations, he can line up at end next to Justin Smith.

NP. I do think we need to address the OLB position but is it our most pressing need?

I think if we're in a position to take someone like Prince or Allen Bailey or even a QB we might go there before OLB and pick one up later. I hope Laboy is back he was solid as a rusher.

I get what you're saying. What I'm worried about is that we have won enough games to get out of the running for Prince and Peterson. All other corners may be a reach at where we're selecting. Also, this is a DB heavy draft and we can find one in the 2nd round (possibly Ras-I Dowling).

QB will be a tricky situation and I'm sure we'll all be paying attention to the Bowl games, Senior Bowl, and Combine to really see how far the drop off is between Luck and the three other 1st round QBs.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

But what you don't understand is that we don't need to switch back to a 4-3 if we selected Kerrigan. He can transition to OLB in our system. He played end at Purdue but also played at OLB when they used three down linemen.

I said it early, if Parys Haralson can transition to OLB for us, Kerrigan should be able to, especially since he has some experience at standing and rushing.

I have no problem with Kerrigan at OLB, that post was in response to some dude saying we have perfect players for a 4-3.

Where in my post did I say we have the "perfect players for the 4-3"? I said its a better fit. We dont blitz enough cause we don't have anyone to rush. Haralson is a bum, Lawsons good at what he does (setting the edge, coverage). I never said a thing about starting Ray Mac, I said he's a better 4-3 then a 3-4. Hints why, if we drafted Kerrigan, our line would look something like:
J.Smith/Ray Mac; Franklin/RJF; Ice/RJF; Kerrigan/Lawson

That only time Franklin started to look like a "solid NT" was after Nolan got fired, and we dumbed down our defense to make Franklin a one-gap NT instead of being a true NT and taking on 2 blockers. But in my opinion he's still average, and not a dominant NT you need in a 3-4. I'm not saying running a 3-4 isn't a better choice as a defense. I'm saying we have square pegs that we are trying to force into a round hole. We don't have the correct personnel for the 3-4. Are personnel is more fit to run the 4-3.

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Right there.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Right there....Read your own posts man.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Right there....Read your own posts man.

Ok cool. I said then I meant it. I still think we are made up of 4-3 players that we try and get to play in the 3-4. That's why our defense is not as good as it could be. Why not play to our defenses strengths. And just an added note......I still think Kerrigan can be really good as an OLB in a 3-4. He's more built as a 4-3 DE, but I dont see him having much trouble transitioning to a 3-4 OLB. Like someone stated earlier, he has experience as a 3-4 OLB in some schemes at Purdue. I'm a Purdue homer and we are known for "tweener DEs" that transition well to OLB. Roosevelt Colvin, Chike Okeafor, Anthony Spencer, Shaun Phillips, Cliff Avril has experience as an OLB.

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Right there....Read your own posts man.

Ok cool. I said then I meant it. I still think we are made up of 4-3 players that we try and get to play in the 3-4. That's why our defense is not as good as it could be. Why not play to our defenses strengths. And just an added note......I still think Kerrigan can be really good as an OLB in a 3-4. He's more built as a 4-3 DE, but I dont see him having much trouble transitioning to a 3-4 OLB. Like someone stated earlier, he has experience as a 3-4 OLB in some schemes at Purdue. I'm a Purdue homer and we are known for "tweener DEs" that transition well to OLB. Roosevelt Colvin, Chike Okeafor, Anthony Spencer, Shaun Phillips, Cliff Avril has experience as an OLB.

No Problem dude. I wouldnt mind drafting him but I guess well agree to disagree about our scheme haha.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Right there....Read your own posts man.

Ok cool. I said then I meant it. I still think we are made up of 4-3 players that we try and get to play in the 3-4. That's why our defense is not as good as it could be. Why not play to our defenses strengths. And just an added note......I still think Kerrigan can be really good as an OLB in a 3-4. He's more built as a 4-3 DE, but I dont see him having much trouble transitioning to a 3-4 OLB. Like someone stated earlier, he has experience as a 3-4 OLB in some schemes at Purdue. I'm a Purdue homer and we are known for "tweener DEs" that transition well to OLB. Roosevelt Colvin, Chike Okeafor, Anthony Spencer, Shaun Phillips, Cliff Avril has experience as an OLB.

No Problem dude. I wouldnt mind drafting him but I guess well agree to disagree about our scheme haha.

I think we both would agree whether its a 3-4 or a 4-3 we ran, it ultimately comes down to coaching, and we do not have that here.

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Kerrigan is in the mold of a Justin Smith and Paul Kruger. I think his best fit is as a 4-3 DE.

Justin Smith is the guy he reminds me of most. Ryan is non-stop the entire game. I still think he's athletic enough to learn to be an OLB. He has a nose for getting to the QB.

He could play the OLB position, but I think he has the greatest potential as a 4-3 DE though.

I agree with you on that. He'd definitely make a quicker impact as a DE then having to transition to an OLB. Another reason why I think us running a 4-3 would be better. Our defense is a 3-4 made up of players perfectly fit for the 4-3.

Wow, no

Wow, no? Your reasoning being? Look at the facts, we have no true NT, Justin Smith is a better 4-3 DE or he could move into DT, no pass rushing OLB which is needed in a 3-4. Lawson would have more sacks as a DE so would McDonald. Ice is more of a 4-3 DT. Franklins more of a 4-3 DT. What's your reasoning instead of "wow, no"?

Well I didnt want to get into this but here you go.

-Justin Smith was a better 4-3 end in Cincinnati, now he's getting up there in age and isn't a great rusher. He's one of the best 3-4 end in the league.

-The reason our OLB's dont have high sack numbers in the scheme. We don't blitz nearly enough. Example, when we actually did blitz Parys Harlson had his best year. Lawson isnt a great pass rusher but still fits in the 3-4 because he can hold the edge well and is a solid coverage guy, which if we do what you want and move him to DE (which I dont think will work because he's undersized) he wont be in coverage which is a strength.

-Next, why do you think McDonald would be such a good 4-3 end. He's slow. He might be a good backup but starting, no thanks unless we want to be worse. McD gets pressure in the 3-4 sometimes but thats because like I said before we only rush 3 linemen 90 percent of the time.

-Then we have Franklin. Solid NT. Nothing special and he's most likely gone next year anyway especially if we make the bad decision and move to the 4-3.

All in all, there are many issues to why our defense hasn't produced like we want it but moving to the 4-3 is a drastic measure. The best defenses in the NFL run the 3-4 for a reason. It's harder to defend. If we came up with more creative blitz and coverage plays like the Ravens, Steelers, and Chargers we would be fine. However we are content with just rushing 3 lineman which to people who dont understand football makes it look like Smith and McDonald are good pass rushers.

So thats why I said "wow. no."

Eh the best defenses in the NFL don't only use the 3-4. Other 3-4 teams that suck are are us, Dallas, Washington, Denver, AZ. Philly and NYG both use the 4-3 and generate way more pass rush than the Ravens and Pats.

We don't have the personnel for the 3-4. Justin Smith can still play end in a 4-3, as a bull rusher he'd probably do better because instead of playing gaps or whatever for the LBs all the time he'd be matched up 1 on 1 vs guys he can beat. Manny would be better as a OLB who drops in coverage the majority of the time. He's not a great 3-4 OLB because he's not a pass rusher. We blitzed Parys plenty last year and he didn't produce very much, he's just not a very good NFL player. Ray McDonald would be way better as a 4-3 End or a DT on 3rd down, when he's gotten pressure in the past it's been on 3rd downs when we go to a Nickel Package with 4 DL and 5 DBs and he gets to rush the passer rather than holding gaps.

I'm honestly sick of hearing how we're a 3-4 team. Every year we have some decent talent and we go into the season hearing how we'll be a top 5 or top 10 D and they don't play that well because they're in the wrong scheme and we do stupid things. Just play to our players strengths.

Kerrigan is a nice prospect, but likely not a game-changing type of football player. IMO, we need to find a way to come out of this next draft with a game-changer, regardless of position.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Kerrigan is a nice prospect, but likely not a game-changing type of football player. IMO, we need to find a way to come out of this next draft with a game-changer, regardless of position.

In my opinion, I think he is a game-changer. He always puts pressure on the QB, which can lead to throw away passes which, if we had ball-hawking DBs, would result in INTs. At the same time, last year he lead the NCAA in forced fumbles, This year he had another 5 FF. You put enough balls on the ground, that changed the game a lot. He lead the nation in TFL. So to me, he is the definition of a "game-changer".

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Kerrigan is a nice prospect, but likely not a game-changing type of football player. IMO, we need to find a way to come out of this next draft with a game-changer, regardless of position.

In my opinion, I think he is a game-changer. He always puts pressure on the QB, which can lead to throw away passes which, if we had ball-hawking DBs, would result in INTs. At the same time, last year he lead the NCAA in forced fumbles, This year he had another 5 FF. You put enough balls on the ground, that changed the game a lot. He lead the nation in TFL. So to me, he is the definition of a "game-changer".

I agree. And from watching some of his clips, he started to get double teamed throughout the game. This should open doors when we blitz.

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Travisty13:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Kerrigan is a nice prospect, but likely not a game-changing type of football player. IMO, we need to find a way to come out of this next draft with a game-changer, regardless of position.

In my opinion, I think he is a game-changer. He always puts pressure on the QB, which can lead to throw away passes which, if we had ball-hawking DBs, would result in INTs. At the same time, last year he lead the NCAA in forced fumbles, This year he had another 5 FF. You put enough balls on the ground, that changed the game a lot. He lead the nation in TFL. So to me, he is the definition of a "game-changer".

I agree. And from watching some of his clips, he started to get double teamed throughout the game. This should open doors when we blitz.

Sounds a lot like Jared Allen...and how many playoffs, Super Bowls has he won?

Not trying to be an ass, just playing devil's advocate here.