will Bowens' & Chester's abscence force us to play more 3-4?? | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

will Bowens' & Chester's abscence force us to play more 3-4??

wonderl33t

Club Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
2,002
Reaction score
13
Location
FRESNO STATE BULLDOGS
I'm just curious, do you think Saban will stick to his original plan of mostly 4-3 w/some 3-4 here and there, or change it to more 3-4 to accomodate our lack of DT depth?
 

HugeFinFan

FinHeaven VIP
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
1,643
Reaction score
1
Age
34
Location
NY
It's very possible, going to the 3-4 only uses one tackle, where as the 4-3 uses 2 tackles. We are thinner at tackle now and deeper at LB so it might make sense...
 

Philter25

MORE COWBELL!!!
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
6,361
Reaction score
1
Location
Arlington, VA
wonderl33t said:
I'm just curious, do you think Saban will stick to his original plan of mostly 4-3 w/some 3-4 here and there, or change it to more 3-4 to accomodate our lack of DT depth?

Same plan. Traylor is too old to play a full time 3-4 NT. Chester is too injured and Carter is too small. We are forced by our personnel to play a 4-3 base and throw some 3-4 looks in there.

If anything, we play more 4-3 because of lack of DT depth. Carter, Zgonina, and Romero are 4-3 DT's. Chester, TimBo, and Traylor are the only 3-4 DTs and Chester isnt rehabbing well, TimBo is borderline retirement, and Traylor is going on 36 and the only healthy 3-4 DT we have.
 

painnotpleasure

Hall Of Famer
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
6,948
Reaction score
4
Location
Maryland
Philter25 said:
Same plan. Traylor is too old to play a full time 3-4 NT. Chester is too injured and Carter is too small. We are forced by our personnel to play a 4-3 base and throw some 3-4 looks in there.

If anything, we play more 4-3 because of lack of DT depth. Carter, Zgonina, and Romero are 4-3 DT's. Chester, TimBo, and Traylor are the only 3-4 DTs and Chester isnt rehabbing well, TimBo is borderline retirement, and Traylor is going on 36 and the only healthy 3-4 DT we have.
:yes:
 
Top Bottom