Panthers/Falcons game day thread~

You more or less answered your own question. Precisely because of the flexibility and variability of the 3-4, it's harder to find players and teach players to handle all the roles they have to fill. Pittsburgh benefited from so many teams using the 4-3 as a base for years, which left them picking the tweeners who were too big for OLB but too small for DE. Now with so many teams being 3-4, I think it's probably harder to find a full front seven including backups, and then it takes a good while for players to learn the scheme.

The nose tackle and DEs make the 3-4, even though the rush linebackers get all the glory. It's not that hard to find guys who can run upfield and get around offensive tackles, but it's very hard to find defensive linemen who can control gaps and develop a feel for where the offense wants to run. Those guys have to hold up for the ILBs to flow and fill.

Really, I think Carolina is going to the 3-4 just temporarily because of all the injuries. I do not think it is a good fit at all over the long-term, since the Panthers lack both the defensive linemen and the OLBs. Charles Johnson is skilled and athletic enough to fill in for now, but I agree that he's best suited to be a 4-3 end.

 

how big is the drop from Charles Johnson the 4-3 end to Charles Johnson the 3-4 DE? Similarly, would Coples be as good as a 3-4 end or no?

 

Ill answer in full tomorrow. I have to run, but I just have to say that you really are an idiot when it comes to defense. I don't say that to be an asshole, I say it because it's true. We've argued before on this. Really, it's fine. Like I said, people here DO ask your opinions, which is why when you act dumb it's not okay.

You pretend to know far more about football than you actually do, and you and I know this. Most people here don't, and while no, most don't say Purr, can you tell me about this or that???, it's because I am hardly here, and because I don't repeatedly say I know more than everyone else. I also truly don't care what anyone here thinks. I'm only here during the season, and then I'm gone. Dude, I don't sit around here trying to build my "character" and the respect of the likes of shitasses like gripfinicker and fucking clowns like that. But you and I both know that you put up a front, and back shit up with stats from ESPN.com or some shit. You certainly don't understand defense, or scheme, because you're here parading about how our defense played lights out vs. the Falcons, and how they held them in check better than other teams. That's a lie, and it comes from the same person who was not aware that there was a comeback route.

I don't bring that up to make fun of you. I bring that up to illustrate your true, very disturbing and real lack of knowledge for anything beyond what a fantasy magazine or stat book can tell you. It's alarming that you also say our defense is playing well, when even the team acknowledges it's not. You cling to these things like some baboon to a tree, and it's bizarre.

You can muddle up the posts by saying I'm not qualified to argue with you all you want. It doesn't have the same effect on me as some others. I don't get mad, I don't want to scream and pull my hair out. That's the shit I just ignore. What makes me mad at you is when you go beyond your boundaries, which is anything beyond statistical analysis.

You're a great poster here, and one of my favorites. Even when you burn me and criticize me, don't get me wrong. When you were banned I was pretty damn upset. And because of that, I hold my breath when you post some dumb shit. I can't do it when it comes to this defense, not anymore. I'm sorry. But you don't know defense, and should really stop talking about it.

(edit for blatant misspelling, not content.)

 

The history of the 3-4 against the run is pretty sound provided a team has the personnel.

The 3-4 is a beautiful scheme, provided you have the personnel.

So is the 4-3.

For a long time, most defenses were not 3-4, so when teams ran it, it was not something most offenses got to scheme against a lot, and therefor, were pretty damned effective.

Ultimately, it always comes down to personnel.

 

No, you say that because you've backed yourself into a corner and have to pretend that no one else knows what they're talking about except you, otherwise you admit that you made a complete ass of yourself and came off looking like a moron. Again, no one agrees with you, and there's a reason for that. The 3-4 generally being a better run defense than the 4-3 is Football 101 type stuff. It's something even casual fans know, which is why you look like such a spectacular dumbass for insisting otherwise. You should just do what I suggested at the beginning and drop it, because the more you argue the worse you look.

I didn't say anything about "lights out" or anything close to that. This is just like you claiming that I said Cam Newton was "awful" when I didn't. Your conscious mind is embarrassed about how stupid you look, and is trying to reorder your reality to something that makes you look like less of a dumbass. Your mind has to pretend that I've said something different than what I have, and that you didn't make a fool of yourself.

No, actually it's an easily verifiable fact.

Because you're not even in touch with reality to be aware of your own limitations. That's why I made the allusion to Thelt. He, like you, is blissfully unaware of his shortcomings. But I assure you that people here think you're a clown. They wouldn't start asking your opinion if you were around more, it's that you've proven repeatedly that you're ignorant. People keep posting proof and it doesn't even phase you. You just keep clowning yourself.

 

All because you say so. You just say it, and it's so. And you always post for everyone else, as if that shit works.

A post that asks if the 3-4 will help a team stop the run better, because the team had issues with it, changed schemes, and now they're wondering if it will help a massive hole. I admire and respect wp, and my feeling as that he was posting it to aid in a food for thought debate, because my guess is that no one cares about the garbage you and I throw at each other, and would rather concentrate on the 3-4 because it's exciting that we're going to start implementing some of it.

And while our team is furiously trying to fix the defense, you still maintain that they played pretty darn good.

Eh, listen. I don't have the energy for much of this right now. I'll post more about it later, with just thoughts about the defenses if I have time, and why I say what I say in fairness to the people reading through this. As for you and me Collin, I'd still buy you a beer, though I'd like to do so while educating you on NFL defenses. Because saying Purrsecutioner doesn't know football just because he had to correct you a few times, is just being outright disingenuous.

 

so what you're saying is the success of a defense depends on its personnel? that's some deep, deep analysis right there. seriously, you should stick to what you're good at: sucking dick and drinking sperm.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...ctiveness-of-34-vs-43-is-found-in-the-numbers

Interesting read. Notice, at the bottom where the comment thread is, how one says how much he loves the simplicity of the 43 because of the effectiveness against the run. No one is making this shit up. The 43 has always been the more traditional front against the run. It may be changing as more teams are going to the 34, and becoming very effective there. But traditionally, it's been the 43.

You look at the numbers w the pass rushers, and the 34 has always been a nightmare for quarterbacks, if run well. It's a defense that caters to a pass rush, and quarterback disruption. Always has been, though perhaps now we're seeing more fronts coming out of it designed to stop the run. I mean...it's not like you can't have 4 on the LOS while you play out of a 34 scheme. You can still have a 4 man front.

This post has sat an hour on here because shit's busy over here, and I wanted to add more, but for now, I'll post this. I don't mind owning up to anything if I'm wrong. And I don't need the acceptance of strangers on a message board to know feel like I'm empowered about football intelligence. Ultimately, we're fans.

One thing I know for sure, is that the Panthers defense needs a ton of work, and it's not just the players. We're not a good defense. If incorporating the 3-4 somehow magically makes us that much better (which it won't, because most teams run hybrids) and it helps us dominate against the run, I'll gladly concede that the 3'4 is the modern day mac daddy run defense!!!11 and shit.

 

I was quoting the article, dumbshit.

So uhhhh....yeah. Oops. Go bitch at them. Down below I was pretty much saying yeah sure....same with the 4-3.

I'll repost: The history of the 3-4 against the run is pretty sound provided a team has the personnel.

Let me make this simple for you, since you're dumb. This was the quote from the article posted.

The 3-4 is a beautiful scheme, provided you have the personnel.

So is the 4-3.

This was me saying sure...it all looks good with the proper personnel. You fucking hack. You're as worthless as they come.

Go stalk someone else please?