On the subject of the 4-3 "switch"

by scriptcomesfirst @, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 15:40 (6248 days ago)

There is a great deal of noise and hand wringing on many of the boards regarding the so-called switch to Tenuta's 4-3, and whether or not we have been recruiting the right personnel for it. I'll leave that issue to those with more wisdom, but it is worth re-visiting the coaching plans pre-Tenuta. I found this old article on BGI some of you may find interesting.

http://www.blueandgold.com/content/?aid=3332

Busco and I have a bit of man-love for JT, I'll admit, but there seems to be a lot of posters on the various boards blaming him for this sudden change. I felt compelled to offer an alternative history.

I'm not worried about the switch.

by PaulM, Chicago, IL, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 19:16 (6248 days ago) @ scriptcomesfirst

To be honest, the number one concern right now is where our linebackers are going to play. We have the depth at D-Line where we really don't need to be worried about finding the bodies to play there anymore, as opposed to last year when depth was a serious issue. This year we can have a reasonable two deep at every position on D with a 3-deep for some key positions like NT, MLB, and CB. We also have some very versatile defenders that can play numerous positions.

That means entirely new questions about the switch, such as "Where do our players play football the best?". If we really do go with the 4-3 Under, and I think we will, there is going to be a tremendous amount of debate on who can play where. I've been thinking about it and I think a lot of these questions won't have answers on where our guys will play until the spring game.

Or even later because of Te'o

by BPH, San Diego, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 22:02 (6248 days ago) @ PaulM

- No text -

powered by my little forum