Close
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 52
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,481

    Default A New 3-4 Thread Yes there was experimentation with it in mini-camp

    As mentioned in the other thread (that is kind of getting out of control with arguments about the positives and negatives of a 3-4) the Bears did in fact experiment with various formations and schemes in mini-camp.

    There's video of what the Bears did and I've had a chance to see more video than what's been available on the web.

    Was it a true 3-4 0-technique two gap Pittsburgh Steelers defense? No it wasn't and likely never will be.

    However Mel Tucker did run a lot of different personnel in and out Shea McClellin, Corey Wootton, Henry Melton and Julius Peppers in stand up rush positions mugging the line of scrimmage in the A-gaps, the aforementioned four DEs on the line of scrimmage etc.

    Tucker it appears is going to do what he can to get the best pass rushers on the field all at the same time even if that means McClellin serves as a linebacker or he has Melton lined up at a defensive end position.

    This doesn't need to be an argument about what scheme works better, it's simply an observation that Tucker is going to stick to Lovie's defense, but he's also going be extremely versatile and flexible with this scheme and bring safeties, CBs on blitzes. There were safeties blitzing from all angles and players lined up all over the place during mini-camp.

    Tucker was RIGHTLY AND FAIRLY criticized for his vanilla attack in Jacksonville, but it appears that during mini-camp Tucker showed a lot of different pressure looks, scheme flexibility and some VERY interesting personnel packages.


    By the way this information is all available with this podcast where Jeremy and Brett went over it and what they saw in min-camp. So if you haven't listened to the podcast there's talk about all the different looks that Tucker used in mini-camp.

  2. A message from our sponsors.


    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.


  3. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to BearsFan51 For This Useful Post:


  4. #2
    Cultural Icon Teddy KGB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,939
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    One of the things to keep in mind.

    Allegedly, the reason Tucker kept the defense vanilla in Jacksonville is because he felt they didn't have the talent to run anything but vanilla.

    He might feel like a kid in a candy store with our pass rushers.

  5. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Teddy KGB For This Useful Post:


  6. #3
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teddy KGB View Post
    One of the things to keep in mind.

    Allegedly, the reason Tucker kept the defense vanilla in Jacksonville is because he felt they didn't have the talent to run anything but vanilla.

    He might feel like a kid in a candy store with our pass rushers
    .
    I agree Teddy, I bet he IS having fun testing out his new toys! And nice post OP, I agree some opinions on this is absurd.

    Tucker is most definitely trying some things out, imo. I believe we actually do have the personelle to run the 3-4 on a "change up" basis. I think fans are a little too black and white on this. I'd like to keep the 4-3 as our base, but show a 3-4 alignment at times. Could you imagine running out into the 2nd half of a big game and sending out a 3-4 formation as an adjustment?

    For me, good defenses confuse the offense. The best way to slow down these new high powered offenses is to confuse them. So I'd like to see a little 3-4 sprinkled in to our defenses as apposed to making the full switch. This virtually eliminates the whole "do we have the personnel to switch" debate, imo. We DO have the personnel to play it as a switchup in our defense, imo. And depending on how it plays out, I could see Emery go either way in the future.




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bear Pride For This Useful Post:


  8. #4
    Anudder member Bearly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,158

    Default

    I'll listen but as I understood it from earlier reports, Tucker was experimenting with guys not getting set and rolling into position just before the snap to disguise things. I liked that proposition. We may not have the personal fit for a 3-4 but it's a different situation when it's disguised and not a pure version. Who cares what you call something as long as what you do is effective.
    Entering the
    Goatz Nebula.
    Hidden Content

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Bearly For This Useful Post:


  10. #5
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bearly View Post
    I'll listen but as I understood it from earlier reports, Tucker was experimenting with guys not getting set and rolling into position just before the snap to disguise things. I liked that proposition. We may not have the personal fit for a 3-4 but it's a different situation when it's disguised and not a pure version. Who cares what you call something as long as what you do is effective.
    Yeah right, and this is where I'm coming from. The more we can disguise things the better! We have the speed, size, and talent to run from both sets, imo.




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bear Pride For This Useful Post:


  12. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bearly View Post
    I'll listen but as I understood it from earlier reports, Tucker was experimenting with guys not getting set and rolling into position just before the snap to disguise things. I liked that proposition. We may not have the personal fit for a 3-4 but it's a different situation when it's disguised and not a pure version. Who cares what you call something as long as what you do is effective.
    To help you out, try not to think of it in terms of a scheme and personnel fit. The Bears obviously don't have the personnel for a two-gap fat bodied 3-4 but it doesn't meant they won't be afraid to use a 3-4 to get their best pass rusher on the field rushing from different angles.

    The Packers and Dom Capers are known as a 3-4 team, but if you watch a lot of their tape from last year they ran a lot more 4-3 than they did 3-4. That had to do with the splits the DTs took and where they lined up Clay Matthews. The Ravens do a lot of the same thing with Suggs and their variation of a 4-3 as do the Patriots and their variation of a 4-3.

    As Emery said there aren't a lot of teams in the NFL that run a PURE 3-4 even though they may call themselves 3-4, they're actually aligning like a 4-3.

  13. #7
    Senior Member Wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    186
    Sports Logo

    Default

    Agreed. From what I read, he did a fairly decent job at improving a very sub-par defense.

    Personally, I'm excited to see what kind of wrinkles he will bring to the defense.

  14. #8
    what the whaaaaat? xer0h0ur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Chicago, IL.
    Posts
    6,995
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bearly View Post
    I'll listen but as I understood it from earlier reports, Tucker was experimenting with guys not getting set and rolling into position just before the snap to disguise things. I liked that proposition. We may not have the personal fit for a 3-4 but it's a different situation when it's disguised and not a pure version. Who cares what you call something as long as what you do is effective.
    This, I couldn't give any less of a shit about semantics. All I care is that its effective at creating pressure and turnovers.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to xer0h0ur For This Useful Post:

    WCL

  16. #9
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BearsFan51 View Post
    To help you out, try not to think of it in terms of a scheme and personnel fit. The Bears obviously don't have the personnel for a two-gap fat bodied 3-4 but it doesn't meant they won't be afraid to use a 3-4 to get their best pass rusher on the field rushing from different angles.

    The Packers and Dom Capers are known as a 3-4 team, but if you watch a lot of their tape from last year they ran a lot more 4-3 than they did 3-4. That had to do with the splits the DTs took and where they lined up Clay Matthews. The Ravens do a lot of the same thing with Suggs and their variation of a 4-3 as do the Patriots and their variation of a 4-3.

    As Emery said there aren't a lot of teams in the NFL that run a PURE 3-4 even though they may call themselves 3-4, they're actually aligning like a 4-3.
    I'm just not down with this "we don't have the personnel" thingy. We just signed Ellis and I think he can make all this come true, imo. Everyone says we don't have a 'fatty'. Ellis is 310 and has been a 'run stopper' for the saints for the last two years!

    Sure, Ellis is better suited as the 3 tech, but that will be our base defense. BUT, Ellis can play the NT as well. He's pretty stout too as he benched 42 times, which isn't quite as much as our other DT Peae, who benched 49 times (record). I think Ellis can be one of Emery's best p/u's, imo. This guy can be a monster as a 3 tech, but is stout against the run as well. He's 310, how much weight does he need to be a 'fatty'.




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  17. #10
    Senior Member Raskolnikov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Enemy Territory via southern CA
    Posts
    4,836
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    I don't know why people think we don't have the personel for a 3-4.

    Melton and Peppers are Justin Smith equivalent DE's in a 3-4. Both have experience on the edge and in all the gaps. And we have TWO OF THE THEM!! Ellis and Paea are not as large as a traditional nose, but as you said, for a change up their strength is sufficient to run the play in many situations and mixing it up. You won't find a stronger DT in the league than those two.

    Shea, Williams, and Washington are perfectly capable of being rush linebackers, and have all done so in their careers. While the rest of our linebackers are smart versatile players capable of the RILB and LILB positions.

    If Tucker is thinking about being versatile.....well that seems to be what we have built. We have versatile personel with many tweeners....

    Peppers-Melton-Shea-D.J.Williams-Washington-Paea

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Raskolnikov For This Useful Post:


  19. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,051

    Default

    exciting!!!!!

    Love the idea of bringing a more agile and faster guy in on passing downs...

    Hate the idea of a full 3-4 switch...

    Love that we can play both now... makes us versatile and unpredictable... love it...
    Alshon Jeffery will be the Bears All Time #1 reciever in TDs Yards and receptions by the end of his career...

    I am the greatest mind to ever grace the CCS message boards... thank you and have a nice day...

  20. #12
    VISIONARY MakeMyDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,091
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Told ya Shea was Url's replacement. ...


  21. #13
    Cultural Icon Teddy KGB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,939
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Lol, with all the shifting, call the defense a 32 and a 1/2

  22. #14
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Now if we disguise stuff we'll have to have the right personnel to do it, so imo, someone like Melton might have to play OLB. If we linup in a 4-3 with say this front .....

    LB - Briggs - Williams - ? (maybe Shea)

    DL - Pep - Ellis - Melton - Woot

    Then we could shift into something like this .......

    ILB - Briggs - Williams

    OLB - Melton - Shea

    DL - Pep - Ellis - Woot

    The key here would be the 3rd LB. In this example I COULD see Shea getting some snaps at SLB, with also switching to the OLB in the 3-4.




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  23. #15
    Don't be psycho! botfly10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    14,455

    Default

    If McC stands up, that doesn't make it a 34.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to botfly10 For This Useful Post:

    WCL

  25. #16
    Cultural Icon Teddy KGB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,939
    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    If Shea stands up and backs up to the linebackers on a play, what would you call it?

  26. #17
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by botfly10 View Post
    If McC stands up, that doesn't make it a 34.
    What do you mean Bot? Shea would have to play SLB in the 4-3 AND OLB in the 3-4, while standing up, thus being able to disguise which defense we were going to run.




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  27. #18
    VISIONARY MakeMyDay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,091
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teddy KGB View Post
    If Shea stands up and backs up to the linebackers on a play, what would you call it?
    A young Brian Urlacher...


  28. #19
    ***Cutty for MVP!*** Bear Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    The Interwebz! ==========================
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teddy KGB View Post
    If Shea stands up and backs up to the linebackers on a play, what would you call it?
    Well, he would either be a SLB or an OLB dropping back in coverage on a TE most likely. This would bring to the table the real question. Can Shea cover the best TE's out there? Or for that matter, in my example, can Melton?




    Warning, the following may be Not Safe For Work or a storyline spoiler.


  29. #20
    My left nut itches... Tjodalv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,638
    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear Pride View Post
    Now if we disguise stuff we'll have to have the right personnel to do it, so imo, someone like Melton might have to play OLB. If we linup in a 4-3 with say this front .....

    LB - Briggs - Williams - ? (maybe Shea)

    DL - Pep - Ellis - Melton - Woot

    Then we could shift into something like this .......

    ILB - Briggs - Williams

    OLB - Melton - Shea

    DL - Pep - Ellis - Woot

    The key here would be the 3rd LB. In this example I COULD see Shea getting some snaps at SLB, with also switching to the OLB in the 3-4.
    Why in the hell would you ever shift Melton to OLB? The entire point of a 3-4 alignment is to be able to mix up who is on the rush, with Melton at OLB there would be no doubt that he was coming instead of dropping into coverage...so basically you would just be running a strangely aligned 4-3 anyway. It would make way, way, more sense to have Woot and Shea or Pep and Shea at OLB with Melton-Ellis-Paea as the down linemen (or Pep-Ellis-Melton if you have Woot on the outside).
    “Reality is infinitely diverse, compared with even the subtlest conclusions of abstract thought, and does not allow of clear-cut and sweeping distinctions. Reality resists classification.” - Fyodor Dostoyevsky The House of the Dead

  30. A message from our sponsors.
    Please Register(it's free!) and Login to get rid of this advertisement.



    Do you want to advertise with ChiCitySports?
    Ranked #1 Chicagoland sports news and message board online.
    A great opportunity for advertising and exposure, with an active base of fresh consumers always looking for sports-related items and miscellaneous "guy stuff".
    Please go here if you are interested in a multitude of placements on this site.
  31. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tjodalv For This Useful Post:


Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •