Switching to the 3-4 defense. Was it a mistake? If so, who made it? What are the implications going forward?

[panel]

It clearly is worse for THIS year and probably for NEXT year as well.

But the NFL is trending towards such a pass happy offensive league that the 3-4 will become the most prevalent system.

We need to play that for years to come, so while it sucks this year (and warning to all, for next as well), it's a necessary switch.

Superbowls are still won with the running game, and shutting down the run. Even the Colts relied on the run when they won the superbowl.

[Destino]

They aren't TACKLING.

That's coaching and play, not a cop out.

Fan's over sell our defensive ranking. The talent on the field is a joke. If you can't tackle, the scheme doesn't matter. That's either coaching, or talent. You decide.

Why aren't they tackling. Did they lose their talent and ability over the summer? Did we pick the wrong players for the Dline? What the hell happened. You can't over sell a fall from top ten to last... but what you're doing is laughably ignoring it.

BTW - one of the reasons players fail is because they are thinking instead of reacting. Coaching and scheme play a big part of that. The players are the talent the coaches are those tasked with putting the talent they have in the best position to succeed. Is there a team in the NFL that wouldn't like a first round draft pick to fill every whole they have? No. You do what can with what you got. For the three years preceding this one they did impressively well with it.

So yeah, a total cop out.

[holmester]

Why aren't they tackling. Did they lose their talent and ability over the summer? Did we pick the wrong players for the Dline? What the hell happened. You can't over sell a fall from top ten to last... but what you're doing is laughably ignoring it.

BTW - one of the reasons players fail is because they are thinking instead of reacting. Coaching and scheme play a big part of that. The players are the talent the coaches are those tasked with putting the talent they have in the best position to succeed. Is there a team in the NFL that wouldn't like a first round draft pick to fill every whole they have? No. You do what can with what you got. For the three years preceding this one they did impressively well with it.

So yeah, a total cop out.

Shanahan wanted a 3-4, so we got one. If you saw the sunday night game between the Steelers and Ravens then you saw exactly why he wanted it. Would we have been better this year in the 4-3? Yes.

But do you really want to build around a player like Fat Al?

Around a MLB like Fletch DE like Carter who's careers are coming to an end?

What other young studs did we have that would guarantee us a great 4-3 defense for years to come? I don't see em and Rak will be a stud either way.

Does anybody think we would have been Super Bowl contenders this year with a top-10 defense that doesn't produce turnovers? Hell no. We would be better, but our offense has zero talent. I am sick of being a 7-9 - 9-7 team because we can rely on one side of the ball to keep us in games. Either suck and get better draft picks or be dominant on BOTH sides of the ball and be a contender. This is what Shanahan is doing and I fully support it. **** the 2010 season. I want a D like Pitt or Balt and am willing to go through the growing pains to get it.

[MusicCitySkin]

The 3-4 is a great defense, it's just too bad our players suck ass and can't tackle.

[nonniey]

The switch is not a mistake. The 3-4 defense has been proven to be the superior defense with the right personnel. Do we have the right personnel? Not really, but we weren't really going to compete this year anyway. Keep the patience! HTTR

Actually, no it hasn't been proven to be the superior defense. Statistically speaking you can't say one is better than the other.

[Halofan21]

I dont think it was a mistake with the switch really as had been mentioned earlier the league is going pass happy and the 3-4 D is the best way to stop it. The problem is we have to in essence build this D fro the round up and I frankly dont have the confidence in Shanann or Allen to put this Defense together.

[CM916]

You have to stick with it now or anticipate an even worse D in the future. I saw every game of Haslett's UFL stint and based on that, I still stand by him even with the 2010 Tuksers showing Redskin tendencies. They figured it out in the end with a three game blowout streak.

[Travdaskin]

My opinion is that they should have waited until this OFF-SEASON to switch. Sign the players you want and need and then start fresh. Our team right now is built for a 4-3, signing Kemo and other bums just because they are the right size doesn't mean run a 3-4, they aren't "good" enough to do it...

[The Full Monty]

3-4 itself is not the problem. I think Haslett is not a very good coach. He never excelled anywhere. I don't know why, of all people, Shanahan chose him, when there were a bunch of other knowledgeable 3-4 defensive coaches, associated with top quality defenses (anyone from the Jets, Pats, Ravens, Chargers, hello???).

Another thing is that shows the 3-4 itself is not the problem is that our guys are often in a position to make plays, but they just whiff on the tackle. Yesterday was not the first time. We just do not tackle well. That goes to Haslett too. Not the 3-4 scheme. Obviously guys may be uncomfortable, but it's not like we aren't in positions to stop the other team.

[NavyDave]

Bad mistake. Did not have the personnel and your main cog on defense let it be known he did not like playing NT our productive DEs like Carter was tried already in the past as a 3-4 OLB and failed.

I'm not sold on the 3-4 being "superior" just because people are enthralled with pittsburgh, the ravens and the ravens clone in jersey.

Tweaking our 4-3 to be more aggressive made more sense.

Now the draft is going to be interesting because the bigger priorities are on Offense, where you need linemen RBs, WRs and maybe even a QB if McNabb is allowed to escape to paradise err Arizona and his summertime pass and to his catch buddy Larry Fitz.

Then no one is going to give up a lot for Haynesworth because they know Shanny ( the hof genius thanks to Elway back in the 90's but not much since) is desperate to get rid of him, so we will need NTs linebackers to replace McIntosh and a heir apparent to our MLB.

---------- Post added December-6th-2010 at 06:43 AM ----------

San Diego as pass happy as they can be was handled by a 4-3 team called the Raiders last night who like the Bears,Giants and the Vikes can get pressure with just their front 4. And I could not see why a Dline of Carter,Hayneworth, Orakpo, etc could not do the same thing

[Leonard Washington]

I wouldn't mind the switch if it were gradual or if the DC was a good coach.

[skins island connection]

Looking at a few other good defenses [ steelers, ravens, jets ] and they all have good/great players to fit the system.

I would be hard pressed to say that Haslett could do anything with them except put them out of position if he had any of those players.

In the beginning of the season, IF the 3-4 was how they wanted to go, it should have been evident that it wasn't going to work, so why continue to run it at this point in time, now that the Skins are out of it?

I agree that it will take time to get the needed players to run the 3-4, but damn, it has done nothing but build stats for other teams; opposing qb's are licking their chops at the chance to play us, and that says alot for how its going.

I agree that there are some dead weight players who need to go, but like others have said, there is nothing that indicates the 3-4 will be ANYTHING remotely close to decent for the next 2 years at best, and Hasless is NOT the one to run it.

Watching yesterday, for the first time in a long time, I was emotionless; I knew the outcome was going to be bad, so I didn't throw things, curse, kick my dog, I just sat there like a zombie, watching the game, just like Haslett does...

[sempre_victrix]

Mistake to flip a switch and go to a 3-4 without getting in 3-4 personnel. These defensive players were geared around a 4-3 and now you are asking them to play out of position in a scheme they haven't a clue about. Spend a few seasons getting some players that know the defense and can play in it before you toss out what worked.

Wasn't this board pretty much in agreement about how stupid it was for Blache and GW to force players to play out of position. After watching this debacle of a season, I see why Al had no interest in playing in a 3-4, especially this version of it. It's not a scheme that suits his talents.

[KDawg]

How many times is this thread going to pop up?

I've said it at least 100 times, and I called it a long time ago. Yes, the switch was a mistake. For a few reasons.

First and foremost, we completely lack the personnel. Think about the roster next season, and perhaps in 2-3 years as far as guys we currently have. To properly run the 3-4 we need:

NT (2) - Maake can play a backup role, but we can't go into next season with him as a starter. If we're comfortable with that, we need one stud, not two guys.

DE (4-5) - Carriker is an okay depth player. perhaps Golston if we can get him to sign. Holliday and Daniels are too old, which is too bad because I like them. 92 is gone (hopefully).

ILB (2) - Blades isn't very good and Rocky will probably be a free agent.

OLB (2-3) - Orakpo is a decent OLB. He's still learning the position. Great pass rusher, mediocre OLB, but he'll be here for years, and I like him. We have no one else at the OLB spot.

CB (2) - Buchanon and Rogers will be free agents. I don't see either being resigned. We'll need corners.

FS (1) - I'm okay with Doughty in a backup role for now. He's not great, but the guy works extremely hard. Good special teamer. Need a starter.

SS (1) - Need a back up caliber player.

On the low end, that's a need of 14 guys. Sure, we'll need to take care of it over a few offseasons... But, McNabb's window will be closed by the time we solidify the D (if it's not already. Which is coincidentally why I believe the McNabb trade was bad for this team. He doesn't fit the direction of the team)

To top it off, the 3-4 2-gap scheme is the opposite end of the spectrum from the 4-3 1-gap scheme. Our entire defense is filled with guys who have played a 4-3 most of their careers. Switching to a 2-gap off the bat is a recipe for disaster. It's a react and attack D. The 4-3 is an attack and react D. You want to ease the transition? First you need a nose tackle. Second, keep the 3-4 as a 1-gap. Are 3-4's traditionally run as a complete 1-gap? No. And it wouldn't have to be. On certain plays have different guys 2-gap to transition to the next step.

So to recap... The third mistake was a lack of personnel for the switch.

The second mistake was running it as a 2-gap D.

The first mistake? Jim Haslett. He or Mike Zimmer are bad choices for the transition. So who else would we have hired? I can't answer that. But I would have went with the 4-3. I wonder what Lou Spanos could do with a defense. He's a long time Steeler assistant (from 1995-2009). The only issue I take there is that he had zero coordinator experience. He's been the "quality control" coach over at Pittsburgh. He'd be a long shot. But hell, I'd rather take lumps with a guy who was with a team that has run the 3-4 for years and seen success with it than run with a guy who allows over 24 points and 335+ yards a game over the last decade.

For the record, as quality control coach, Spanos worked with the linebacker and secondary in Pittsburgh and was a part of all three Super Bowl appearances. He would be interesting. I'd guess he'd fare better than our pal Jim Zorn in the new role as well. So there's just one suggestion. If I researched long enough I could probably come up with a laundry list of names.

But, the excuse is still: Who else would we have hired? There was no one there.

But, that excuse is gone. There are going to be defensive coaches available, for both systems this offseason. So if we keep Haslett, what's the excuse? This may be an all time worst defense in NFL history. That's something I'm going to look up today.

[Mursilis]

The switch is not a mistake. The 3-4 defense has been proven to be the superior defense with the right personnel.

Any proof for that? People buy into all the myths, hype, and lies about the 3-4, but I see no evidence of its so-called superiority. In the last SB, the Saints beat one of the best passing teams ever while running the 4-3. The Giants that beat us yesterday, and the Patriots offense, the best ever, in the Super Bowl? Yup, another 4-3. That 2000 Ravens defense which was the best (statistically) ever? Back then, they ran the 4-3. But Shanny's ego wanted to ride the popular trend, so we're going 3-4, and now a former top 10 defense is THE WORST in the league. And this is why Shanizorn is overrated, IMHO.

[USS Redskins]

Huge Mistake - given the strength of this team for the last few years has been the Defense. If this team would have had a good QB and O-line, then they could have made some real noise from 2004-2009. The D was good, not great but complimented with just a competent offense, would have been much better. To come in and blow that up, putting so many players out of their natural positions is asking for a debacle - which is what they have.

I dont care if the 3-4 can work in the future- you will get nothing close to a competetive defense with this crew even after 2 years of running it. The front 3 are a complete joke- the LB's average and out of position, 1 good corner (Hall) and safety (LL) and the rest are total backups to backups and throw aways.

[chipwhich]

Why aren't they tackling.

So yeah, a total cop out.

They aren't tackling because of Age.

Top ten last year is LAUGHABLE. Do you realize what our strength of schedule was last year verse this year? Consistently calling our defense top 10 in the league last year is a bigger cop out to avoid the glaring obvious. Last years team playing this years schedule would have been a slaughter in worse proportions.

Phillip Daniels? Really? Vonnie Holiday? Really? Our list of d-lineman is long, and most wouldn't see the field on other teams.

Stop over selling last years defense. Thats the ultimate cop out. Even the perennial professional Fletcher has shown his age has caught up to him. He has lost a step.

We are old and slow, and that's why we can't tackle. It's not because of the scheme.

[DieselPwr44]

Any coach that comes in here and takes two double sack players from a year ago and purposely puts them out of position= bad decision.

Want to run the 3-4? Fine. Just make sure you have the basic blocks to start with. We didn't even have that.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Any proof for that? People buy into all the myths, hype, and lies about the 3-4, but I see no evidence of its so-called superiority. In the last SB, the Saints beat one of the best passing teams ever while running the 4-3.

They were also one of the worst defenses in the NFL that year.

The Giants that beat us yesterday, and the Patriots offense, the best ever, in the Super Bowl? Yup, another 4-3.

The Giants have been up and down defensively over the past year, and really cratered last year after Spags left. And the Giants have Pro Bowl level talent everywhere in their front 7, with guys like Kiwanuka not even being able to get on the field except situationally. I doubt the 4-3 scheme is the reason they're that great.

That 2000 Ravens defense which was the best (statistically) ever? Back then, they ran the 4-3.

Sure, but the Ravens recognized the direction the league was going in, made the switch, had some growing pains (with infinitely more talent than we have), and now, they're as good as ever, even while Ray Lewis and Ed Reed get older and older.

Right now, the 3-4 is the better defense, especially against teams with smaller and less physical offensive lines (teams like the Colts, Patriots, Eagles, and arguably even teams like the Falcons and Saints), and against teams that rely on the pass. 3-4 defenses have generally been more consistent over the long haul - Steelers, Dolphins (their defense was top 15 even during the 1-15 season IIRC, it was their O that stunk on a historical level),Ravens, Patriots (except this season because they're starting four rookies in a complex scheme), Chargers, hell, Dallas prior to this season's meltdown has had a good defense (keeping mind their secondary has been garbage since Woodson left)

Also, I take issue with the idea that nose tackles are super expensive or hard to acquire. Aubrayo Franklin was a cast-off from the Ravens. Paul Solai was a 4th rounder. Jamal Williams was undrafted. Ratliff was a 7th rounder. The Ravens...uh, well, I can tell you this, Ngata is NOT their regular nose tackle; they actually platoon at NT with Gregg, Ngata and Cody, and they'd prefer to have Ngata play DE. Gregg was the regular starter at NT for a long while. Hell, we could have had our nose tackle if we had kept Antonio Dixon, who we ALL knew would be a player in this league! The Chargers are starting 31 year old Antonio Garay, a guy who was out of the league with a shattered leg, and getting a lot of production out of him!

So, in general, you don't need to go NT round 1; only the Steelers (Hampton), Patriots (Wilfork), and Packers (Raij) among 3-4 base teams have first round drafted NTs, and only the Packers have one drafted in the top 15 (Hampton was taken #19, Wilfork was taken #21).

In fact, I'd argue that the 3-4 needs less overall talent to run, as long as the talent is concentrated at a few key positions - edge rusher, NT, ILB and the rest is just finding good scheme fits. The Steelers (replacing Joey Porter with a practice squader, finding Lamarr Woodley in the 4th), Ravens (Ed Reed gets hurt? No problem. Ray Ray misses a few games? Our backup is just fine) and Patriots (bye Vrabel and Bruschi, hello Banta-Cain and Mayo) have been plug and play for years (though the Patriots went too far with it this year with 4 rookie starters including 2 in the secondary). The Dolphins don't have any overwhelming talent right now, maybe Dansby, but what other "star" defensive player does that team have? The talent of the Jets is all in the secondary for the most part. Right now, we're sucking because none of our 4-3 guys on the line have transitioned well (and one of them doesn't want to transition), and Haslett kinda sucks as a defensive coach.

Meanwhile the Giants only got good when they hired Spags, and need 4 Pro Bowl linemen to run it effectively it seems, the Titans needed a motivated Albert Haynesworth as well as solid ends, the Panthers had Peppers, a healthy Jenkins, and Mike Rucker in his prime, the Saints have sucked defensively for years and are only now playing top defense, and as for us, well, I still refuse to believe that the 4-3 that gave up leads and failed to produce turnovers for half a decade was "top 10" in any sense just because we played ball control and refused to give up the big play. And bear in mind, even with the deficiencies along the line, we had multiple Pro Bowl level LBs and safeties (Springs when healthy, Champ, Pierce, Washington, Arrington, who ironically would have been an outstanding 3-4 fit, Fletcher, Landry when he wasn't being misused) including some guy who might have had a chance to be the best to ever play his position...Taylor was his name?

All in all, this thread proves to me that everybody who comes on this board talking about rebuilding is blowing smoke up their asses. We're seeing a rebuilding on the defense, with this year being an audition for who will actually stay in this 3-4 defense. Guess what; the fans are ****ing. Imagine if we had gone for an all out, tear it down to the foundations rebuild, which, considering the schedule and the fact that we didn't have pieces to work with, would have made us 2-14 or worse? While I wouldn't mind (though I'd have to endure a lot of crap from friends and family), "Redskins Nation" would have gone ballistic. Even more so when Shanny declares, UFL castoffs and undrafted FAs and all, that we're looking to win the Super Bowl.

[tshile]

if your mentality is 'win now', then it was a mistake becuase we didn't have the personel.

if your mentality is 'this is what we're doing, and we're going to need time to get the right people' then no, it's not a mistake. we just need time to get the right people.

[KDawg]

if your mentality is 'win now', then it was a mistake becuase we didn't have the personel.

if your mentality is 'this is what we're doing, and we're going to need time to get the right people' then no, it's not a mistake. we just need time to get the right people.

What's your timeframe for getting the right people?

When we need both a whole new offense and defense that kind of makes getting the right people a 3-4 season process. Coupled with the fact that the McNabb trade was a win now move (he won't be here in 3-4 years when we've acquired the pieces... Well, he might be here, but hw won't be near as productive... Which at the moment is a scary thought considering he's not productive now).

We should have hit the reset button completely. I think that would have bought this team a few years to get the offensive and defensive pieces in place. But, that wasn't the approach we took year one. Now they can either admit that this year was a semi-waste (semi because some of our players will be back and now have a year experience... But we didn't come in with the rebuilding philosophy) or continue down the road of mediocrity.

[Mursilis]

What's your timeframe for getting the right people?

When we need both a whole new offense and defense that kind of makes getting the right people a 3-4 season process. Coupled with the fact that the McNabb trade was a win now move (he won't be here in 3-4 years when we've acquired the pieces... Well, he might be here, but hw won't be near as productive... Which at the moment is a scary thought considering he's not productive now).

As I've said before, this team's philosophy is Lose Now (by getting overhyped, only-wanting-to-get-paid vets like Haynesworth, or fading guys who don't really have it anymore, like McNabb and Brunell), and Lose in the Future (by trading away picks)!

[scuppajones]

It was a mistake, we had pieces in place to field a solid 4-3 defense and we knew we need a total rebuild on offense. We had good 4-3 players, like Carter, Daniels, Rocky, Golston, Haynesworth, Orakpo. Now we have to rebuild both sides of the ball. Completely overhaul both the offensive and defensive lines, it makes no sense.

At this point it is best if we just lower our expectations for the Redskins, be happy we didn't get shut out yesterday. There are no Super Bowls or playoff runs in the future.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

The McNabb trade was a miscalculation as much as it was a mistake - Shanahan most likely thought that McNabb (borderline HOFer pre-Shanny) would come into his system and be John Elway 2.0, just like Elway (borderline HOFer pre-Shanny, and arguably some of the same issues with accuracy and decision-making) came into his system and blew up. At worst, he'd repeat the production he had last year. He also likely thought the line would be way further along than it is, which is understandable, seeing that Denver line went from 43 sacks to 22, and their YPC went up by a full yard. With that in mind, he thought he could experiment with the defense that makes big plays, but gives them up as well and have a dynamic offense carry the team, if not to the playoffs, then to respectability (think a poor man's 2009 Saints, or even this year's Pats) while the defense gets rebuilt. But he did not, most likely, expect the offense to be awful.

I really feel Shanny underestimated the challenge he had in front of him.

[tshile]

What's your timeframe for getting the right people?

When we need both a whole new offense and defense that kind of makes getting the right people a 3-4 season process. Coupled with the fact that the McNabb trade was a win now move (he won't be here in 3-4 years when we've acquired the pieces... Well, he might be here, but hw won't be near as productive... Which at the moment is a scary thought considering he's not productive now).

We should have hit the reset button completely. I think that would have bought this team a few years to get the offensive and defensive pieces in place. But, that wasn't the approach we took year one. Now they can either admit that this year was a semi-waste (semi because some of our players will be back and now have a year experience... But we didn't come in with the rebuilding philosophy) or continue down the road of mediocrity.

i don't know, i'm not a GM. I would imagine 2-3 years, with the possibility of random people you pick up having good years - see anthony armstrong and brandon banks, you couldn't have predicted either would have been contributors in any sense, but both are.

people keep saying we're not rebuilding. that we're trying to win now. i'm not so sure... when you bring in 24/53 new players, in an offseason where you have so few draft picks and the CBA makes free angency complicated/weak, what is that? we'll see this offseason based on how many people they let go what's really going on here.

the best thing the team could do moving forward is to start playing the backups to see what they really have. we don't need to see what mcnabb, cooley, fletcher or hall have. we need to see what perry riley has, what john beck has, fred davis and paulsen have, etc etc etc.

we need to know who can fill a role next year, and what position absolutely needs an upgrade right now.