Could a temporary switch to the 3-4 be the answer to Carolina's defensive woes?

I’d really rather not. It does make sense given the fact our interior line is crap. But we just signed Balmer who was a complete wash in 3-4 schemes in SF and SEA. Plus it really hurts to have a $70 million five technique 3-4 DE.

I’ve been thinking about this since those last 2 games. the 3-4 would def help short term. Our LB corps is really strong, and it would be fun to see them on the field at the same time. Nice post James.

I don’t know how much it would work, but nothing could be worse than the open-gate method we’ve utilized at DT so far this pre-season.

I thought we were supposed to be running some 3-4 looks anyway in a hybrid 4-3/3-4 scheme.
Have we shown and 3-4 yet this preseason?
Rememeber everyone he said TEMPORARY meaning just 2-games maybe.

I’m game for the idea for a few games or even fix it up on who we play.

And we should keep in mind, they would have to learn the 3-4 scheme, which is time they could be using to learn the current 4-3 scheme, which I’m sure they don’t all have a grasp of yet.

IMO, we need to stick to our current plan and only run the 3-4 as a curveball.

to stop being pushed off the ball. Our D-Line got pushed around for the entire game against the Bengals. The D-line needs to get lower and incerease their pressure. It just made me sick to watch our entire D-lLine get pushed to the right and left every time they ran the ball.

I’m just not sure switching to a 3-4 will alleviate that.

Would probably have to be implemented in the offseason… not 12 days before real bullets. Especially with all the “new stuff” they have been cramming in since the CBA got signed.

so why bother making a switch…get a guy and plug him in…is Balmer the answer maybe maybe not. But as pointed out Jamal Williams works in both schemes so…what would be the point of switching to the 3-4 when all our players are most familiar with the 4-3…seems like we be taking a further step backwards on D…thats the last thing we need

I understand the thinking, ( E Brown and Hardy playing at a “better” position for them , Conner on the field more, lack of credible DT’s) But it doesn’t put your best players in the position to do their best work.

It’s like managing a business. You don’t lower your standards to accommodate for your weakest people not being able to do the job well enough. You keep your standards high and demand the low performers step up or you move them out. Will their be more bumps in the road? Yes. Will it be harder in the short term? Yes. Might it take longer than you’d like to get the business to where you want it? Yes. But that is how you build the foundation for a great organization.

I don’t think we have 3-4 OLBs. With Beason and Connor we have an ideal inside tandem, but Anderson and Davis would be better fits in that weakside MLB spot that Beason would already occupy.

I would rather go to a 4-6 Bear look…something that Rivera is intimately knowledgeable about.

There is an install period for implementing a wholesale change like this. It’s one thing to use it occasionally as a wrinkle, but as a primary D, no thanks. Without very stout D-linemen it will make a team actually worse at stopping the run.

After the last game I thought about asking about this idea. It solves the problem of what to do with our over abundance at linebacker and removes a dt, which is perhaps out biggest weakness. I don’t like the idea of switching out scheme completely but maybe.

It would probably benefit a few players, though (like E. Brown), but in the end, I think it’s too drastic of a change on such short notice. As far as I know, they haven’t even experimented with a 3-4 set at all this offseason. Let’s stick with the devil we know, please.

DT: Williams, Williams, Fua, McClain, Balmer
DE: Johnson, Hardy, Brown (Alex not Everette), Norwood

This would be solid.

WOW