2theadvocate.com | Sports | Defense talented, untested — Baton Rouge, LA Interesting article on the defense. Now I see why they are loading up on DL in this recruiting class. They are considering moving Davenport and Clement to offense. Some interesting information on Mingo and Montgomery maybe playing LBs in a 3-4 defensive scheme, sounds like they really like them but they are having a hard time finding the exact spot for them. DL - Nevis (Sr.) - Aghayerere (So.)-RS - Clement (So.) -RS - Edwards (So.) - Brocker (Fr.) -RS - Davenport (Fr.) -RS - Downs (So.) - Logan (Fr.) -RS - Montgomery (Fr.) -RS - Levingston (Sr.) - Mingo (Fr.) -RS - Other walkons, hopefully I didn't miss anyone You take Clement and Davenport to offense, and move Mingo and Montgomery to OLB then you have to recruit quite a few DL in this class and some of them might be get playing time. Basically the DL would look sorta like this. DT Nevis, Downs, Edwards DE Levingston, Logan, Aghayere, Brocker
good article. I had mentioned moving Montgomery to linebacker due to his size and speed earlier this year and other fans scolded me. I would be ecstatic if we ran a 3-4 instead of a 4-3. Just blitz Chavis, blitz! But do it w/o giving away where the blitz is coming from like we did this year. Anyone else remember when Trev and Bradie used to move the defensive linemen around into certain gaps right before the ball was snapped. I'd love to see one of our Linebackers step up and be able to get the defense in the right position from the field and not the sidelines.
Why do you think that? I'd rather us move fast DE's to LB than nickel backs and safeties to LB. I'm sure i'm reaching a bit, but it would be nice if Montgomery could play somewhat like Ware does for the Cowboys. He is a DE gone OLB in a 3-4.
It surely has its advantages, what I would think to be at the top of the list is forcing opposing QB's to account for that 4th LB which is often not an easy thing to do. With the limited amount of pressure we put on QB's this year, taking a man off of the line and putting the secondary more at risk just doesn't seem like the best thing to do even with #7 out there. I'm not sure I want a "fast" DE gone OLB trying to cover a scat back out of the backfield either. I'm not saying its a disaster, it may end up being a good move. I'm sure there is a reason I'm in a sports bar getting smashed on gameday instead of wearing a headset but I'll be damned if I can figure it out.:grin:
While 3-4 wouldn't be my ideal set, it does have certain advantages as far as LSU is concerned. It allows for four linebacker, which was a strength for us this year, and only three linemen, which couldn't do much in the passrush department or stop people going up the middle. I don't think we should adopt it hook line and sinker, but with the linebackers we have, it can't hurt to do it every now and then. The only problem is having a good, hefty nose tackle.
love your signature. anyone hating on Gary Crowton is ok by me. I was thinking about that. I guess the OLB in a 3-4 wouldn't cover the scat back that much if he is really a hybrid DE. Not sure how they handle that. Maybe the ILB slides over or the safety picks him up. I would think the best way to guard it is with a zone D, but I hate zone D's. I prefer our man to man. Hopefully if we stay with the 4-3 our new DL can actually apply some pressure, but after this year of letting the QB kick it all day, I welcome any change to our defensive philosophy. Especially with the we telegraphed some of our blitzes, it would be nice to actually include the element of surprise.
This is just a personal thing with me, but I don't really feel comfortable when we rush less than four or five guys. By design, the 3-4 allows for an average of three unless you blitz one or more linebackers. If we continue to follow bend but don't break, and our DL does not grow exponentially, I don't see the 3-4 being a foundational part of our defensive scheme for long. If, however we get: -three beefy, quick, and strong linemen -four fast, strong, intelligent linebackers -a fast and vigilant secondary It can work. I think the LB's are the strongest link so far. I just don't know if the line and the secondary can step it up enough to make it a big part of our defense. It did work reasonably well when we went to it a few times this season, though
It is funny that you will see many teams get better pressure rushing 3 as opposed to 4. I wonder why that is?
I was thinking we would still rush at least 4 on every play if we convert a DE or 2 to OLB, it just wouldn't be so obvious where the pressure is coming from. I'm not a fan of rushing only 3. I noticed we blitzed some in the Penn St game, but still couldn't get to the QB. Thought the 3-4 might help with the deception of where the blitz is coming from.
