We've seen 3-4 and 4-3 under. Now for 3-4 under.
by hmills110 on Jun 13, 2009 8:02 PM CDT
Email
PrintFrom the FanPosts -Primetime
KaloPhoenix's fine articles on the 4-3 Under and the 3-4 and all the discussion that went on then have me thinking that the "hybrid" D is going to be a 3-4 under sort of scheme.
Anyhoo, I went back and looked at Kalo's original posts, and mined a few more explanations and a few already outdated comments. We seem to have a stronger grasp of who'll be where doing what, thanks to TheQ's Redshirt (Defense) and Whiteshirt (Offense) Stock Report postings.
This discussion is all going to be pretty basic. Just the basic alignment and philosophy.
I'm no expert, but I've gathered that "under" means loading up on the weak side. "Over" means shifting the front to the strong side. I'm putting the two diagrams together in one post, so we can maybe talk about 'em, and straighten Mills out.
Here's the basic 3-4 alignment (Diagram 1):
Notice that the NT is head-up on the C. We don't expect to see a lot of that. Instead, see Diagram 2, with the NT lined up in 1-tech. That's where Tank's lining up in practice, right now, at least in the (so-called) base, 1st-down D. Notice also that the RDE is in a 5-tech on the left offensive tackle. Dorsey will be in a 3-tech, by most accounts. That's probably why there's an evil 4-3 under undercurrent in all our discussions. 
Here's the basic 4-3 under alignment (Diagram 2):
From OTA reports, the base alignment appears to have Tyler and Dorsey in 1-tech and 3-tech, respectively. This is the same "look" as the 4-3 under, with ?Hali? at WOLB playing the role of RDE. Just change the DE on the right side of diagram 2 with LB and you have the idea, as long as you understand that that DE is going to be upright and possibly a yard or two wider and deeper than is shown. Also, Dorsey will be the DT on the right side of Diagram 2. Just pencil in "DE" in that spot. With Tank slanting towards the C, as we have heard, this alignment seems aimed at blowing up the weak side of the offensive front, and at giving Dorsey better opportunities to penetrate and make plays.
Based on this, the image in my mind is of the defensive front throwing a roundhouse right and pursuing the play from the back side, while the strong side LBs are coming around on the strong side to meet the play from the other side, assuming the offense flows to its strong side. And by overloading the weak side and attacking up the field from that side, that's most likely where offenses will be looking to go, where Jackson is waiting for them, and Vrabel is running to meet them.
There seems to be a difference of opinion about Dorsey's role in all this. Are they freeing him up to make tackles, or, in the tradition of the 3-4, is he going to try to engage linemen, so his LBs can make tackles? My opinion was originally that he'd be expected to clog up the weakside A and B gaps, but it does sound like they're scheming to give him 1-on-1 opportunities.
So what does a schmuck like me do to get a handle on all this? At present, I'm going right down the middle, and projecting that Dorsey's job will vary according to the situation. I think that sometimes the middle-clogging DT role will be the bread and butter and shooting-the-gap will be the changeup. Other times, other games, he might start out lookin' to penetrate, and tying-up two guys might be the changeup.
All in all, a fine body of work by AP contributors. Some really good discussion there. Better than you see 'most anywhere. Just skip over all the hmills110 posts, to save time. I found it rather enlightening to do just that, during this slow time. Kinda cool to read what folks were thinking at that time, and how things have evolved since.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.
81 comments
|
12 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you hmills
I really enjoy reading about the different defensive alignments because my knowledge pales in comparison to so many others here.
This is a good read.
Thx, Prime.
Y’all run a class outfit.
But admit it. Promoting one of my FanPosts is a cry for help on a slow news day.
Nope
This will get pushed up the rec list so most would disagree with you :)
by Joel Thorman on Jun 13, 2009 9:17 PM CDT up reply actions
Also
Hmmm
Maybe I’ll start writing here if I don’t get this job with Bleacher Report.
LOL
Try www.signonsnadiego.com
and see where that gets you:)
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions
My bad
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 6:37 PM CDT up reply actions
You making fun of my local rag Steve_Chiefs? ;)
That’s alright. Go ahead. The SD Tribune is quite possibly the worst news publication in the US. No joke, it’s that bad. You can’t even get good coupons out of it anymore. Booo Thuper Chargerzzz!
Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!
No, I hit their above mentioned website and it had shutdown.
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 15, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions
There are some good folks at Bleacher Report
But too often they completely make things up, it hits the internet, then the higher-ups go back and label it as “humor”.
by Joel Thorman on Jun 14, 2009 6:53 PM CDT up reply actions
Good read, hmills
Glad they’re playing to Dorsey strengths, lining him up in a 3-tech like he should, instead of over the guard in a 1-tech as he did last year. Hopefully, if Hali can stretch out that tackle, Dorsey’ll get some good 1 on 1 opportunities to show his talent.
I could get more sacks with my sack
I think you're right.
I think it was easier for the C to give the G help against Dorsey in the 1-tech, and I think that’s what most teams did, because the rookie was a true 1st-round-quality threat, imo. Dorsey can still slant toward C if he chooses, but in the 3-tech, he presents the LOT with a Hobson’s choice between Dorsey shootin’ the B gap inside and Hali tryin’ to turn the corner on him in the C gap. If it’s productive, I can see a lot of teams runnin’ 2 tights, and I think the Chiefs will be happier going big against big than have to worry about extra speed in the pattern. They’re set up to go big, with a pair of new widebody draft picks, and two existing DEs switching to rush LB. Plus it’s always good to see an offense field a slower group of 11 players on offense. I think the true test of this D will be the extra WR sets, after consecutive seasons of playing scared against those sets.
He got doubled intentionally for sure.
That to me makes his rookie year even more impressive even though others are saying it was disappointing. You had a guy in there who had the most tackles of any rookie in that position and was given the ultimate compliment of other teams planning to double team him because they knew he was there. Fact is with him eating up 2-3 guys on every down last year we shouldve been able to get pressure on the QB, that just shows how awful the play calling and guys around him were.
by GenericBrand on Jun 13, 2009 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions
I think Tyler's a little wider to the left than Diagram 2.
More on the inside shoulder of the G than the right shoulder of the C. Minor distinction. With Tank slanting toward C, they’ll probably want to run the stunt where Dorsey scrapes to the left behind Tyler and crashes the strong side. The unmentioned key in this is Tyson Jackson tying up the RT and RG, and giving up some of the C and D gap responsibilities to the strong side LBs.
From what I’m hearing, they’re planning to do more to protect their LBs, and the easiest way to do that is minimize what the LBs have to do between the tackles. If they accomplish only THAT, this year’s LB corps is already about twice as good as last year’s.
I agree with you about Dorsey
But I was thinking Tyler would be on the C’s right shoulder but don’t know enough about it to know if it’s a minor distinction or not. Do you think Jackson would be 5 tech or 4?
Anyway, great post.
And I like the first diagram referenced
It has the numbers to show you what’s 1 tech, 2 tech, etc. Someone posted something similar a while ago and it’s the best way to keep track of these things.
by Joel Thorman on Jun 13, 2009 9:47 PM CDT up reply actions
The above diagram
shows the 1 tech on the right guards left shoulder but doesn’t number the centers shoulders. That’s why I stated it as I did. Also I think I’ve seen other diagrams that number the C’s shoulders as 1 and the guards inside shoulders as 2 with no number straight up on the guard. Anyway, Jackson in the 5 tech is kinda what I thought but wasn’t sure.
I think heads-up on the C is ZERO.
And any kind of offset probably gets lumped into strong- or weak-side 1-tech.
KaloPhoenix linked AP to the diagrams.
I just linked you to what Kalo’d already done. Kalo gets the credit for bringing those charts to the discussion. I just thought a learner would appreciate seeing both of them together, to compare and contrast. I probably already covered these thoughts earlier, without the diagrams being available in the immediate document.
I was kinda concerned about re-hashing old material, but it seemed like there was still more knowledge to be mined from seeing them side-by-side. Plus those discussions all pre-dated the recent OTA reports, and more of us have a handle on who’s where, in the wake of the Redshirt and Whiteshirt posts.
Comments at/near draft day were Jackson is archetypal 5-tech 3-4 DE.
I think I heard that from Pioli’s lips in a podcast. He also talked about how the DE job description was changing. Tyson Jackson was NOT drafted to be a premiere edge rusher. As for the numbering scheme, to give you an idea of MY background, the 3-4 diagram at the top was my first exposure to the whole numbering system. I’ve been using the 5-tech term for a matter of weeks, not months or years. I’m learning by reading and writing, mostly.
As I piece it together for myself, a lot of the remarks made by Carroll in the 4-3 under on the USC Trojans site don’t jibe with the things I hear from Chiefs sources on what the philosophy is. On the other hand, the traditional 3-4 diagram expects a lot more from the DE on the perimeter and more from the LBs in the middle, particularly the strong side B gap.
Your question, breeder, makes me think you are thinking the way I am, sorry (for you) to say. My twisted version of the main theme of the D-front has both DEs cheating toward the inside, if anything, with the LB looking to mop up to the OUTside. And that kind of thinking would put Jackson at something closer to the 4 that you brought up. Understand this would be the so-called “base defense” idea, and there would undoubtedly be a lot of variations off that, once the offense sees what the base D is trying to do.
The advantage to this kind of thinking is it would let the LBs pin their ears back and attack off the OUTside shoulder of the DEs. With THAT pattern established, I reckon there’d be variations in which the LBs attack up the middle, but only after the offense has decided it has to maneuver aROUND that boulder in the middle of the field.
Ironically, if the base theme is well-executed, most of the downs in most of the games will look nothing like what I describe, because offenses will try to hurt the D in some other way. Offenses are going to try to run wide on ‘em, I expect, and try to take those widebodies out of the equation. Then the issue will be if this D can flow QUICKLY to either side and have more guys waitin’ than there are guys comin’, and we’ll be worrying about how well the front 3 are clogging up the cutback lanes. The farther upfield the LBs can meet the ball-carrier, the easier this will be for front 3.
In the 4-3 under, as described by Carroll, DE is outside of OT, DT is outside of OG, and being hooked from the outside by a blocker is the kiss of death. Against the 3-4 in my imagination, the offense setting the edge on your DE means you’ve already won your first battle and the offense has ceded you the middle. It’s OK for the DL to get fenced-in, as long as they’re never driven away or overrun.
Love this
“…..that boulder in the middle of the field.”
I hope that Boulder is LT to RT wide and 8 foot tall! HaHa
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions
And thanks for the thought the other night
Just watched “The Curious Caes of Benjamin Button”
Some really poor Dad role models in that one.
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 11:53 AM CDT up reply actions
You're welcome, Steve.
There’s a really fine balance to strike with your kids. I wish you well on it. If you can enjoy one another and STILL instill values, discipline and work ethic (and some work skills), you’ll be in the sweet spot!
Comments like “boulder in the middle” might be more indicative of my (your?) couch-potato x’s and o’s and general strategy than anything real that happens on the field. But it is the way I think of it, especially after a season of watching LBs who weren’t sure whether to go inside or outside and typically arrived too late to prevent the D from being gashed. I was nothing but pleased to hear what Pioli had to say about the kind of d-line he wanted.
Sitting in the sweet spot here :)
Sweeter would be the Enemy O writing of the between the Tackles plays and the QB writing of the o’er the middle slants. Dreaming but Sweet Dreams nonetheless:)
Nice Post!
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 9:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Tank is critical
Great post! I may be wrong, but my understanding of the reponsiblities is slightly different.
You say Tyson Jackson will be tying up the RT and RG, but if Tank is being effective…he should be the only player double teamed (C and RG). LDE, Tyson Jackson, is heads up with the RT. LOLB, Vrabel will be lined up on the tight end. UT/RDE, Dorsey will occupy the LG, and ROLB, Hali will tie up the LT.
If Tank can demand the double from the RG and C, it will free up the two ILBs and allow Jackson to work 1 on 1 with the RT. If Tank can not demand the double team… it will make Thomas’ job much harder taking on the RG all day.
by chrisclark_dfw on Jun 13, 2009 11:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh yeah?
Well that’s why I wrote what I wrote. So you’d teach me up, chris. What you say about Jackson is 100% in keeping with Pioli’s “classic 5-tech 3-4 DE” remarks. But I still see Jackson honoring the middle MUCH more than turning the corner on the LOT in the C gap. I think he’s going to be more of a power move to the tackle’s inside shoulder than speed move outside. If Jackson’s effective, it will be a major distraction to the RG. I think he was brought in specifically to tie up 2 linemen, rather than rack up sack totals, so everything we learned about DEs kind of goes out the window.
If you’re a more sophisticated reader, you might have your mind cluttered with a detailed job description for the 5-tech that doesn’t jibe with my musings. I labor under no such handicaps, being as empty-headed as they come. :o)
The right guard will have his hands full
trying to decide whether to help against Tank or Jackson. I agree Jackson at 5 tech and main responsibility is to clog the B gap.
At least in the 6 games with the AFC West
We would only , at RG. have to worry about Carlisle with Oakland.
San DIego has Forney or Vasquez and Denver has squat at either G slot.
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 11:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Good one Teach
I think I understand the “technique talk” a little better now. Good guess about Dorsey, but I still feel that he is a great 4-3 DT that will be under-utilized as a 3-4 end. (I think I just started something!)
Rec’d.
In a base 3-4
Dorsey probably would be under-utilized however in our 3-4, IMO, more often than not he’ll be in the 3 or 4 tech and not the 5. I believe they will use him to his best abilities and we’ll have a lot of flexibility.
I hope you are right breeder
We need our top 5 pick from last year to be a success. I hope we don’t have another pick that high ever again.
Heh. Me, too!
With so many picks these last years that went so high, I don’t see how the Chiefs will be able to keep ’em all!
I'm not sure you said exactly what you meant.
Under-utilized in the 3-4, but better-utilized in OUR 3-4? Is that what you meant?
I mis-read it at first.
People’s comments afterward got me to re-parse and re-alize what you meant. Isn’t this a cool site, where misunderstanding leads to clarification rather than rancor? Don’t know how they manage it.
Do things get a lot more out-of-hand during the season?
I don't know h
I just found this site in February. It’s going to be a fun year with everyone at AP. I’ll be watching the games much differently than in the past. Now have(I think) more football knowledge and a lot more to learn.
Yeah, those "5-tech" and "9-tech" remarks were tossaways for me.
But around about the 8th time I looked at Diagram 1, it dawned on me. Most of the guys who use those terms don’t think like teachers, and are just using the lingo to make a point, so it’s not always clear to us poor saps what they’re talking about, and it doesn’t occur to them that they’re leaving half their audience behind. That’s why the best teachers are often those who really struggled to master the concept. They understand the hurdles that learners are facing better. Nothing worse than a “genius math teacher” who spends all day speaking truth that nobody understands.
Don't be so hard on yourself
Just enjoy. The moment!
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions
(imagine the voice of Wilford Brimley) Back in my day...
we called them dangfangled things “gaps”. My coach would always yell at us and say “Men, if you can’t control your gap, it’s your ass.”
Thank you and good night.
:)
Sounds like you served your time in the trenches, Q.
I was always the little guy with a far outside shot (OK, NO shot) at a skill position (Think Brody Croyle as a pro). I never understood all the hoopla about running backs. Yeah, I was a huge Ed Podolak fan back in the day, because he had the ball and that’s about all I understood as a kid, but it didn’t take long to realize that those guys’ stock rose and fell on the backs of the widebodies up front. Always been a fan of what the big men could do and how much effort it took for ’em to do it!
I think that we will be running a 4-3 and 3-4 under mixup
When we are running a more tradition 4-3 I expect to see Alex Magee lining up alongside of Glen Dorsey, Tank and Tyson Jackson on the otherside. Glen Dorsey, and Alex Magee can flip flop around, and this will be a powerful line.
Wear out the line, and mix it up with a 3-4 under with Tamba Hali in the mix, and we are going to see some nice mismatches that our Defense will take advantage of…
At least I’m hoping it will look like this.
ahhh yes...hope
“hoping”…I think that about sums it up at this point in time. My guess is that the D is still in a state of becoming. For one thing, there may well be one or two personnel changes during camp.
Birthing
A powerful and not wholly pretty site.
Why do we modern men have to/get to participate?
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 14, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions
The 4-3 look will be bigger.
They might not be as FAST at LDE as they were with McBride. But I can easily see a 5-man front, with McBride in for Vrabel, in a look that’s similar to last season’s, only with 3 TRUE widebodies in the interior, and an extra pass-rusher up on the line. The addition of Jackson and Magee shows a commitment to true stout in the middle. And if Tyler and Edwards come in at 320+, think how much bigger the interior line will be than last year.
They should be able to move people off the line, and with LBs whose first calling is to attack the backfield, there should be more bodies flying around the QB. No more looking for a Jevon Kearse kind of freak at DE (and even he can be a liability in the run game). The way they’re handling the front line should give ‘em more depth and consistency in the rotation, too. It’s really hard to staff a dominant front 4 in today’s league, and going stout with 3 guys and looking for most of your sacks from the other 8 guys seems like a really sensible way to go.
I completely agree... I think that we will go more strong and big with a 4-3 front.
Mixing this up with the 3-4 under/over will create some disturbances at the line.
It seems that our linebackers are going to lock up the sacks, and Tyson Jackson might throw his name in there for a few. At least this is how it was in Arizona, and is what I expect to occur with the same coaching staff.
Agree, ravenhawk.
And I guess, seen in THAT light, we hope for Playoff Pendergast. I wonder how much the rediscovery of a running game in Arizona affected the success of their D. Big plays to WRs are great for putting up points, but you also need to run some clock or have tremendous quality-in-depth in your big men on D. I think this team will have better quality-in-depth.
It’ll likely be a base 3-4, and even THAT alignment will have more mass up on the line than last year’s 4-3! It will be cool to see just how “base” the “base D” will be. There are indications it may only be their 1st-and-10 “look,” with varying degrees of 4-3, depending on situation and what seems to be working. But when in 4-3 (under), they’ll be bigger, for sure.
There should be a few sacks fall to Jackson. My sense is that the big difference will be the 3 in the middle will be collapsing the pocket vertically, but continuing to honor the middle. They don’t have to get tremendous penetration (in the base scheme), so much as deny escape lanes and push everything towards the QB (Get yer hands up!). In that base scheme, the LDE would be likely to pick up a few sacks, when the back side blitz flushes the QB into his grasp. I kind of feel like sacks by the d-line, though, will be a sign that the edge rush is getting the job done, and the d-line is just playing solid team ball.
That’s far from an exhaustive coverage of how things would transpire, as the D and O change things up, but I think that’s the basic idea. The one thing they want to be very very good at executing is that base D. Once the outside pass rush starts pulling hats to the flanks, there’ll likely be opportunities for somebody to attack up-the-gut. But the basic scheme (as I see it), will try to blitz off the edge.
Thats how I was seeing it also...
The inside linebackers primarily stopping the run if they get past the line, and helping to cover the short pass in passing situations. At the same time I do see Derrick Johnson, and Zack Thomas coming in on blitzing packages.
Mike Vrable, and Tamba Hali will be part of the blitz. Then again Tamba Hali I see as predominately coming in on most plays, so that really isn’t a blitz per se.
Thanks for the post I think I’m seeing how this will all come together. I’m sure not completely but I have a much better understanding of how our defense is going to play.
I already said more than I have authority to say,
just talkin’ about 3 DLs and 2 LBs, in virtual isolation against o-line plus TE, and not very much about the TE, at that.
When it comes to the ILBs playing coverage, I’m mostly a “Cover? CUHver? You talkin’ bout…. COVER?” guy. Sure, smack the TE in the mouth or blow up the RB on your way by him, but on passing plays, I think there’s generally more good to be gained by harassing the QB with a LB than running him with a TE or RB in the pattern. LBs in coverage is a change-up in my book after the blitz has gotten inside the QB’s head. It’s one thing to telegraph a 1-on-1 mismatch on a LB (don’t do it), and another to drop an EXTRA LB into the zone when he’s not expected to be there, and the QB THINKS he has a 1-on-1 with the corner, but doesn’t. Sorry to repeat myself.
The Chiefs are not going to run a 5-man front
unless it’s at the goal line or 4th and short. 5 players with their hand in the dirt plays right into the hands of any team remotely capable of passing.
Usually 3 with hand-in-the-dirt
would be my guess, too, Dagda. My point was more about how imposing the 5-man rush would be, when I used the term “front.” The 3 down linemen, plus 2 OLBs is going to be bigger than any 5-man rush the Chiefs had last year. As our resident sematicist, you are quite correct in pointing out what you did. In my mind’s eye, I didn’t see 5 down linemen as the front KC would be showing.
Correct
Teams that run a 3-4 can and do put both OLB’s up on the line, outside of the 2 DE’s.
They are in 2-point stances, but a line of Vrabel, Jackson, Tyler, Dorsey, and Hali is still imposing
(and if we run anything similar to the Steelers, all 5 may rush, Hali and/or Vrabel may drop into short zones, or Hali, Vrabel and Tyler may rush with Jackson and Dorsey in short zones, or…)
Marley will be walking soon...she could probably play Linebacker better than some of the guys we had.
Definitely a 4-3 to dominate the middle.
But as described, I’d definitely want to see a speedy blitzer in the mix. I think Magee will be a real player, but he may not really start emerging until after the bye or next season.
Anyhoo, maybe you and I are getting a better sense of what “hybrid” might mean.
I'm thinking a mix, but let better heads than mine give you something more definitive.
I think the gap to the inside shoulder will be the primary responsibility, and finishing plays outside the hashes will be bonus material. That’s probably unresponsive. As far as I can tell, I’m talkin’ 1-gap, with a bit of 2-gap 5-tech from Jackson. But I still think he’ll be in more hot water if teams run INside him than if they run OUTside him.
As opposed to Pete Carroll’s 4-3 under discussion, which I cited indirectly, and is the source of Diagram 2 (via KaloPhoenix), the d-linemen will be concentrating primarily on denying the run in the middle and advancing, more or less in skirmish order, up the field on passing plays. Carroll gives the DE full responsibility for the C gap (same as Cunningham), which is more than I think we’re going to see. Carroll puts the DE in a 6-tech, and it’s not the DE’s fault if the D gets gashed in the B gap.
Jackson will have a good day if nothing from the LOT to the ROT gets past his 2 brothers and him, and a great day if he tracks down the ball-carrier outside the hashes a few times. But make no mistake. This D is being designed to deny the run up the middle with its interior 3 guys. How WIDE they can make that center, and how many extra plays they manage to finish OUTside the hashes might then become an issue. But if running up the middle become tantamount to throwing yourself on your sword, the Chiefs will have achieved their short-term aims, imo.
+1
Skirmish order and throw yourself on sword.
We don’t need Tank and Jackson to make the sacks.
Tank will Occupy turf from Weakside A Gap to Strongside 2 headup guard.
Jackson will Occupy Strongside 2 to C gap and will get help on C gap from OLB.
2 players will Occupy 3 O-lineman on most every play and possibly 4 if the TE has to help on Jackson. The Mike backer can watched the under-slant patterns and drop to medium depth on a read or help crush the run. Sweet to me:)
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 16, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Isn't it bad enough without repeating?
Heh. I think we’ve prob’ly annihilated this dead horse. Only argument I haven’t totally thrashed out on D is secondary schemes. A lot of stuff they do doesn’t make sense to me.
My Rock :) You
Denver has annihilated the Dead Horse. HAHAHAAAAAAAA
Let's Kick some ASS in 09 or Die trying
by Steve_Chiefs on Jun 16, 2009 9:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Hope to see a lot of different looks
I think the front 3,s responsibility is to close off the middle and stop the run or force it outside. Whether they are lined up 5 tech or 3 tech or in the middle of the B gap probably does’nt matter that much as long as it plays to our guys strengths and stops the run. I like the Wade Phillips 3-4 where the ends line up in the B gaps and the NT takes the center at an angle. May be a better position to attack the offense in its backfield whether run or pass. He’s used it for over 30 years and seemed to work well when he was DC under Marty S in San Diego. Anyway, blah blah blah IMHO.
Well If I’m thinking correctly Dallas uses a 1 gap system(also allowing a smaller NT) which might play to our strengths this year(If Tank/Ron can’t hold down the NT). Which led to Dallas’s NT(can’t think of the name atm) to rack up a nice sack #. SD uses more of a 2 gap which Williams job is to hold down the C/G and stop the run up the middle allowing less sacks for him but also pushing the run outside.
Both scheme’s can use a different NT, I was just wondering where you would see our defense this year with Tank/Ron at the NT.
Not sure, BAMF.
That’s why we’re having the discussion. I’d be interested in what you think about it. Early talk was that Tyler was probably more of a center-clogging kind of player than a 1-gap pass rusher, and the d-line would be playing more to honor the run. I like what breeder just said up above your mesg.
I could see a mix of 2 gap responsibilities during obvious rushing downs to clog up the middle, but using a 1 gap system on passing plays. Tank isn’t a rusher(from what I’ve seen anyways) so on rushing downs I could see the 2 gap with him clogging the middle. On the 1 gap plays, could Dorsey slide over to NT to penetrate?
by BAMFSpecialOps on Jun 16, 2009 1:26 PM CDT up reply actions
In the 3-tech, I'd imagine he'd just attack in the B-gap.
But yeah, some have discussed putting Dorsey over by Jackson in some situations (4-3 look?). I’m not sure he’d have any more advantage getting up the field from there, compared to weak side 3-tech.
Anyway, makes total sense, BAMF.
When they go 1-gap would be a good time to mix in the LB up the middle. Your discussion is helping me understand. Thx.
I believe Wade Phillips has been the Dallas HC for a couple of years so they probably are using the 1 Gap system.
I just watched today the 1994 game at Denver with Elway vs Montana and Marty S vs Wade Phillips as HC. Good game with Montana throwing a TD pass with 8 seconds left for the win.
Just to note
If Pendergast comes from the same school as Parcells/Belichick/Saban, then you would probably see either Dorsey or Jackson sometimes lining up in a 5 tech and sometimes sliding down into a 3 tech, allowing Vrabel or Hali to get their hand down in a 5 or 6 tech and rush the passer. This is why Pioli wants versatile players.
The neat thing is that with the draft picks for the last 3 years and the UDFA signings on the DL, there should be several serviceable bodies that can be rotated in and out to keep the big fellas as fresh as possible.
I believe that the front 3 has lined up as
Jackson-5
Tank-1
Dorsey-3
Seems it would give a little more line penetration but also allow more blockers onto the second level.
Except for 2 things, BAMF:
- - The d-line’s job description has changed quite a bit – as much (or more) tying people up as finishing plays themselves, at least in the base D.
- - The OLBs are playing a LOT more like d-line. Counting upright players, the Chiefs will have something closer to a 5-man front than the 4-man front we saw last season. And those 5 will bring more mass and muscle to the line of scrimmage than ANY 5 guys the Chiefs have had since Derrick Thomas was looping around Darren Mickell, with Dan Saleamua, Joe Phillips and Neil Smith rounding out the 5-man front. And even THAT defense was more than likely to send ANOTHER up the field on any given play.
I just heard that(atm I can’t think of where, except for it was on the radio while I was driving to work).
That IS the projected front 3.
Also, Tyler and Dorsey were trained in KC as penetrators. Tank’s job description should be quite a bit different. But maybe neither his nor Dorsey’s will change all that much. Just have more muscle in the action on the line of scrimmage. I wasn’t dissin’ you or anything, BAMF. Your statement is in line with what we know.
Well that was just the first time I heard it outside of here...
Just thought it would be nice to post it. Showing that even with the code of secrecy now put in place, KC fans are never in the dark ; )
No worries, hmills
by BAMFSpecialOps on Jun 27, 2009 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Jim Irsay says he would welcome Peyton Manning back … at the right price
- Roddy White isn’t thrilled with Roger Goodell’s $20 million salary
- Could concussions actually kill football?
- J.T. Thomas arrested for possessing some marijuana
- Bucs hire Butch Davis as ‘special assistant,’ have no issue with his double-dipping
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
