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

MakeMyDay

VISIONARY
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
2,225
Liked Posts:
1,630

I read what you wrote and then it was gone...Now I understand why it was only up for a minute...

It was a pretty good read when you posted it earlier but no links or pics so it was a bit confusing...

Now I see your story here...and it is still a good read...Nice effort.

Chicago Bears All-22 Tape Break Down: Shea McClellin's Versatility

During mini-camp the Bears did a lot of experimentation with their fronts, their blitz packages and different ways in which they were going to use their best pass rushers. They showed looks that had some 3 down linemen 4 linebacker looks, 4 defensive ends at once, and flipping Melton outside and Peppers or Wootton inside. They even had Shea McClellin roving around in gaps as a a linebacker as an end or inside as a defensive tackle.

None of this stuff with McClellin is exactly new, but it highlights a lot of the ways the Bears plan to be versatile with the second year defensive end. One of the ways the Bears used McClellin last year was like a linebacker.

I was browsing around a recent Chicago Bears forum and came across a play that was described in detail on the board about McClellin. Inspiration took hold and I wanted to go look up the play on the All-22 and see precisely how it all went down. The basics of it McClellin was in a stand up linebacker role and ran down the middle of the field with Jason Witten the Cowboys' tight end.

http://www.midwayillustrated.com/2013-articles/june/chicago-bears-all-22-tape-break-down-shea-mcclellin-s-versatility.html

This play demonstrates his ability as a linebacker and shows a role he's likely more comfortable in rather than sticking his hand in the dirt like a DE. There's nothing to say that McClellin can't be a pass rusher, but the Bears should be a lot more flexible with him rather than trying to make him play a position he's neither suited for nor comfortable playing.
 

broughtupbears

Active member
Joined:
Sep 2, 2012
Posts:
440
Liked Posts:
156
Location:
In your head
The point is to make the defense as a whole better. Scheme versatility seems to be the theme. Having a versatile scheme has benefits to the whole and makes the entire d unpredictable. Star of the defense is the defense, keeping that theme going will be essential.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
May 4, 2010
Posts:
27,077
Liked Posts:
15,163
The point is to make the defense as a whole better. Scheme versatility seems to be the theme. Having a versatile scheme has benefits to the whole and makes the entire d unpredictable. Star of the defense is the defense, keeping that theme going will be essential.

But if that "versatility" includes going into a defense that doesn't play to your best players strengths...how is it good?
 

Decatur Staley

CBMB Legend
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
1,414
Liked Posts:
443
Location:
Rockford, IL
Well, partly because of the reports of Melton in minicamp standing up on some blitz packages. That's why. However, nothing was set in my example as far who would switch. The point was someone would have to switch between the SLB and OLB. Also, the point of disguising the defense is to catch them off guard, I agree, but if Melton can drop back some successfully, then, as you say, it might catch them thinkink he's only going to rush. I guess that's the point is to confuse them. But we do have a bunch of versatility, as you point out.

I think Khaseem Greene might be a good candidate to switch between SLB and OLB. He can cover and rush...
 

Chris Sojka

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
6,685
Liked Posts:
2,620
I don't know if a 3-4 plays to the strengths of the Bears best defenders.

Peppers is going to demand a double-team no matter what, so putting him in a 3-4 and asking him to take up space is wasting his ability and shortening his career. Its not that Peppers wouldn't be able to play a 3-4 DE, its just not the best use of his skills.

Briggs can take away an entire area of the field with his all-around ability. He is smart, can fight off blocks, and can cover. Having him be a 3-4 OLB is pointless, because he has less area to cover (and he can cover more), and while he can probably be effective as a blitzer, there isn't a need to freelance with Briggs because he can play his position without taking chances.

Melton is can generate interior pressure...he is relatively young, quick, and has just enough size so that he's not a run liability. Putting him at NT would probably negate his inside pass rush, and putting him at DE in a 3-4 would make him an outside rusher, which really isn't his strength. And if you put him at DE, you'd be spending something like $25M in cap money on your DEs in a 3-4...very strange. It would be like a baseball team paying top dollar for its #8 and #9 hitters.

To me, the rest of the potential personnel moves are just window dressing and/or trying to cover up deficiencies. Paea is just a "guy". Hardin has yet to play a down and doesn't really fit into any position. McClellan doesn't really fit into a position either, and isn't all that good.

Switching your scheme to benefit your worst players while being detrimental to your best players doesn't make any sense to me.


^^^^^^^^^^^^
Good read...

its makes no sense to me either... unless you believe that somehow by changing the scheme it allows your great players to adapt and still be great... while the players who were sub par in your former scheme increase productivity and become increasingly effective...

Shea is a good example of a guy who has speed and can be effective in the right scheme... will it take away from others... I don't know... I mean really how much do our supposed star players really have left? Briggs Tillman Peppers? are they still the stars of the defense? or are Shea Melton Bostic Jennings supposed to step up and receive the torch this year? After all it has to be passed eventually...
 

WCL

Organ Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2011
Posts:
7,830
Liked Posts:
9,011
I don't know if a 3-4 plays to the strengths of the Bears best defenders.

Peppers is going to demand a double-team no matter what, so putting him in a 3-4 and asking him to take up space is wasting his ability and shortening his career. Its not that Peppers wouldn't be able to play a 3-4 DE, its just not the best use of his skills.

Briggs can take away an entire area of the field with his all-around ability. He is smart, can fight off blocks, and can cover. Having him be a 3-4 OLB is pointless, because he has less area to cover (and he can cover more), and while he can probably be effective as a blitzer, there isn't a need to freelance with Briggs because he can play his position without taking chances.

Melton is can generate interior pressure...he is relatively young, quick, and has just enough size so that he's not a run liability. Putting him at NT would probably negate his inside pass rush, and putting him at DE in a 3-4 would make him an outside rusher, which really isn't his strength. And if you put him at DE, you'd be spending something like $25M in cap money on your DEs in a 3-4...very strange. It would be like a baseball team paying top dollar for its #8 and #9 hitters.

To me, the rest of the potential personnel moves are just window dressing and/or trying to cover up deficiencies. Paea is just a "guy". Hardin has yet to play a down and doesn't really fit into any position. McClellan doesn't really fit into a position either, and isn't all that good.

Switching your scheme to benefit your worst players while being detrimental to your best players doesn't make any sense to me.

But no one is really talking about running a pure two-gap 3-4 in which the linemen are space-eaters. They're talking about the Bum Phillips one--gap 3-4 that most 3-4 teams run these days (Texans and 49ers are the best examples). Here's that 3-4 (I took this from a Bills site, so ignore the numbers):

3-4_Over_v2_PIC_medium.jpg


The alignment, gap responsibilities and personnel are no different than our current defense. The front five players would be (left to right) Peppers, Melton, Paea, Wootton, Anderson. The back two would be Briggs and Williams.

Everyone would line up exactly where they do now, except Peppers who would take a step back and take his hand out of the dirt.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,064
Liked Posts:
23,370
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
But if that "versatility" includes going into a defense that doesn't play to your best players strengths...how is it good?

What if what your D does well isn't what stops a particular O.
 

JaySix

New member
Joined:
Aug 22, 2012
Posts:
778
Liked Posts:
189
This, I couldn't give any less of a shit about semantics. All I care is that its effective at creating pressure and turnovers.
agree.
If we on a particular play want Pep, Wotton and Shea to rush the passer, one of them needs to stand up. Simple as that, if we need to audible that play Shea and Pep are more than fast enough to drop back and not embarrass themselves on one play. Doesn't make us a 3-4 team but we did line up in a 3-4 on that play per definition... Who cares.
 

Bear Pride

Bears Gonna Shock the World!
Joined:
Aug 28, 2012
Posts:
10,616
Liked Posts:
3,075
But no one is really talking about running a pure two-gap 3-4 in which the linemen are space-eaters. They're talking about the Bum Phillips one--gap 3-4 that most 3-4 teams run these days (Texans and 49ers are the best examples). Here's that 3-4 (I took this from a Bills site, so ignore the numbers):

3-4_Over_v2_PIC_medium.jpg


The alignment, gap responsibilities and personnel are no different than our current defense. The front five players would be (left to right) Peppers, Melton, Paea, Wootton, Anderson. The back two would be Briggs and Williams.

Everyone would line up exactly where they do now, except Peppers who would take a step back and take his hand out of the dirt.
Exactly, and no one is talking about a complete scheme switch, either. Your image above shows the 3-4 except I'd imagine in this set, Ellis would replace Paea, Shea would replace Anderson, and I'd probably put Melton on the other side to beef up the strong side. I'd like to see a little Washington mixed in as well. The Bears DL and LB's have lot's of versatility, that's for sure.
 

Top