Poll: What base defensive scheme would you prefer we run?

[clownfish]

I've read plenty of posts regarding who will be our next DC over the last few days. I've also read some posts questioning the use of the 3-4 when we may have personnel that would fit a 4-3 better. Thought this would be a good time to see where people stand on our personnel.

We all know what our current 3-4 lineup looks like up front. I'm only guessing when I list the lineup that might be with a 4-3. There are some other front 7 guys on the roster, but they are way down the depth.

LDE Taylor, Merling
LDT Ferguson, Langford, McDaniel
RDT Starks, Soliai, Dotson
RDE Wake, Porter, Moses
SLB Ayodele, Torbor
MLB Crowder, Folsom
WLB Anderson, Walden

I don't like the way some of those positions look in the 4-3 scheme. We have almost too much talent on the D-line and VERY THIN talent in the LB positions. With that said, the one and only thing I loved about the Nick Saban era (besides drafting Ronnie Brown) was the use of the hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense. I felt it was really complex and gave a lot of teams problems. If we could get another starting LB to replace Ayodele or Anderson, I'd really love the hybrid.

I know that a lot of people are gonna wanna bring up the fact that Parcells is a strict 3-4 guy, but lets just leave those posts somewhere else. This poll is for fun and for a "what if" while we wait to hear about our new DC. So what do you guys think?

 

[iceman7213]

I agree 100% with hybrid defense.

 

[FinsFan24]

First of all, we are not switching back to a 4-3. We are just now getting our personnel fitted to a 3-4. Look how good Starks played this year compared to last. Switching back now is just moronic.

Plus, we already ran a hybrid last year. Sure it was labeled a "3-4". But I saw Wake, Porter, Taylor, Anderson etc. all with their hand in the dirt. Sure they were labeled OLB's, but they were definitely in the same role as a 4-3 end for all of those plays.

I for one was fine with how our Defense was. Bad LB and Safety play ended up costing us the playoffs and PP his job. The only thing I didnt like about our D was that it wasnt aggressive enough. They attempted to bring maximum pressure with minimum players, and we all saw how that worked out.

Whoever we get as our new DC, i really hope he brings a similar style of defense with much more aggressive fronts. I would really hate to have our D go through another transition year learning all new schemes and everything.

So now that Butler and Groh are out, who are the leading canidates anyway?

 

[SRM]

I like the hybrid. I'd have to imagine it's way harder to figure out as opposed to just one of them. Especially if the front 7 don't get in their stances, and just kind of roam around a little and confuse the whole offense.

 

[lbmclean_sj]

I prefer 4-3 because it is easier to get personnel for it

real deal NT's are so hard to find and if you find one and he gets hurt then it is harder to recover within the season

I don't see college ILB's as being suited to the 3-4 task either, maybe I am wrong.

if there were an unlimited supply of college talent of every size I would prefer the 3-4

are 3-4 OLB's harder to find than 4-3 rush DE's?, I am not sure. perhaps

 

[GoonBoss]

I'm a 4-3 guy. The 3-4 makes sense to me but I've just seen it fail so much that I'm winging back to the 4-3. Ultimately, in football you have to control the LOS. You do that witha 4-3

 

[lbmclean_sj]

I like the hybrid. I'd have to imagine it's way harder to figure out as opposed to just one of them. Especially if the front 7 don't get in their stances, and just kind of roam around a little and confuse the whole offense.

I hadn't thought about how hybrid we are until CKP mentioned how our FO is looking for a very, very stout SOLB in the draft. perhaps they thought Merling would be that but he couldn't make the transition.

so I am thinking our next SOLB will be in the 250+ range if we can find that guy. so if you have a huge Sam who is asked(I am assuming) to drop into coverage occaisionally how far are you from a 4-3?

this has been a talking out of my *** moment

 

[ChambersWI]

I don't care as long as we don't play god awful vanilla schemes. Jim Bates had as vanilla of a scheme as you could get, but got lucky with Jim Johnson getting some good talent on D.

We've committed to building a 3-4, we just need to finish the job.

 

[ChambersWI]

I hadn't thought about how hybrid we are until CKP mentioned how our FO is looking for a very, very stout SOLB in the draft. perhaps they thought Merling would be that but he couldn't make the transition.

so I am thinking our next SOLB will be in the 250+ range if we can find that guy. so if you have a huge Sam who is asked(I am assuming) to drop into coverage occaisionally how far are you from a 4-3?

this has been a talking out of my *** moment

I think Merling was that, but he put on so much weight after his hernia surgery (went up to 290), but also carries that weight well. Plus, he's played well at DE so they'll keep him there. Now Matt Roth was stout at SOLB, but we have no idea what he did to piss everybody off.

 

[JJW1339]

Which base defense would you prefer to run next year based on our current personnel?
One that works!!!!!

 

[Awsi Dooger]

I'm a 4-3 guy. The 3-4 makes sense to me but I've just seen it fail so much that I'm winging back to the 4-3. Ultimately, in football you have to control the LOS. You do that witha 4-3

Same. I've been watching plenty of old Canes tapes since that U documentary aired and it's scary how dominant a 4-3 can be. I'd almost forgotten, given the mush that passes for defense these days.

Greg Cote did a Hall of Fame worthy rundown the other day. It was a liberal list, plenty of young guys with much to prove, but nearly void of DL and LB. Other than Ray Lewis you had to dip down to his 50% category to find anyone.

That would have been unheard of 2 or 3 decades ago when the 4-3 ruled. There were scary defenders throughout the league, easily identified. You could look at a guy immediately and know where he slotted. Now it's a pathetic series of concessions and tweeners, and in general too much strategy and not enough relentless annihilation.

 

[clownfish]

I think Merling was that, but he put on so much weight after his hernia surgery (went up to 290), but also carries that weight well. Plus, he's played well at DE so they'll keep him there. Now Matt Roth was stout at SOLB, but we have no idea what he did to piss everybody off.

That could end up being this FO biggest mistake so far. My Dad's been a Browns fan for 50 years so I actually take some interest in that team. I saw Roth play after the trade a couple of times and he looked very good. He actually roamed a bit from what looked like OLB/DE to ILB/MLB. That motor of his is unstoppable, he set the edge in our running game well, and he had a badazz attitude.

Well, I'm glad this thread garnered some discussion. I was beginning to worry after 25 responses to the poll and only one post. Maybe since we're on the subject, someone could breeze over the main responsibilities of each position of the front 7 of the 3-4 versus the 4-3 in terms of coverage, rushing the passer, and gap coverage. I know there is a bit of confusion about that amongst us posters, including me or else I'd type something up about it myself. C'mon, someone school us.

Also, it seems a lot of people like the hybrid defense. It is really obvious we need an injection of youth and talent in the LB corp. I hope we get at least 2 ILBs and 1 OLB in the draft and free agency. Anyone have any idea who would be the ideal candidate for the DC job if we were to go hybrid? My guess would be Dan Pees because the Pats have run a hybrid defense of sorts over the last few years.

 

[Tiko377]

4-3 because NT's for 3-4's are really really hard to find good ones are anyway.

we have personal for both wake could be a DE,or OLB same with taylor..... we need to get a really good NT if we gonna stay with the 3-4 dont tell me solai is the man either.

to me theres no preference because both are good d's but 3-4 requires different type of players

 

[ChambersWI]

That could end up being this FO biggest mistake so far. My Dad's been a Browns fan for 50 years so I actually take some interest in that team. I saw Roth play after the trade a couple of times and he looked very good. He actually roamed a bit from what looked like OLB/DE to ILB/MLB. That motor of his is unstoppable, he set the edge in our running game well, and he had a badazz attitude.

Well, I'm glad this thread garnered some discussion. I was beginning to worry after 25 responses to the poll and only one post. Maybe since we're on the subject, someone could breeze over the main responsibilities of each position of the front 7 of the 3-4 versus the 4-3 in terms of coverage, rushing the passer, and gap coverage. I know there is a bit of confusion about that amongst us posters, including me or else I'd type something up about it myself. C'mon, someone school us.

Also, it seems a lot of people like the hybrid defense. It is really obvious we need an injection of youth and talent in the LB corp. I hope we get at least 2 ILBs and 1 OLB in the draft and free agency. Anyone have any idea who would be the ideal candidate for the DC job if we were to go hybrid? My guess would be Dan Pees because the Pats have run a hybrid defense of sorts over the last few years.

how much of that is the Browns lack of talent though? David Bowens (a rush DE) had to start at ILB a lot this season. Matt Trusnick was strictly a ST player with the Jets and was starting at OLB his second week in Cleveland.

but yeah we need an injection of youth since Crowder is really our only young LB (unless you think Folsom will develop into something)

 

[GoonBoss]

Same. I've been watching plenty of old Canes tapes since that U documentary aired and it's scary how dominant a 4-3 can be. I'd almost forgotten, given the mush that passes for defense these days.

Greg Cote did a Hall of Fame worthy rundown the other day. It was a liberal list, plenty of young guys with much to prove, but nearly void of DL and LB. Other than Ray Lewis you had to dip down to his 50% category to find anyone.

That would have been unheard of 2 or 3 decades ago when the 4-3 ruled. There were scary defenders throughout the league, easily identified. You could look at a guy immediately and know where he slotted. Now it's a pathetic series of concessions and tweeners, and in general too much strategy and not enough relentless annihilation.

Seriously well said. The principal I went by was the military's own of ; "Make contact with a few, then, manuver the many". That makes sense to me. But, I think in football you have a known enemy. It's ok to make contact with more.

I'm pretty much done with the 3-4. It sucked back in the day, and, it sucks now.