Gspotter

It's a difficult D and that's why it's used so effectivly by some teams. It's also not the D teams see most often so that causes some difficulty. I've seen some really quality QB's look shabby against that D specifically. Of course, a former poster is probably right on when he wrote that our money is spent on people like Stah, so this is moot, unless it impacts the way we're drafting for the future. I expect no change, but TL did say that we'd be alternating and so far, not so much: his idea, not mine. I also think that TC wasn't too kean on it...maybe wrong though.

I agree totally. It's only unfair if you think of the implications of national TV coverage that generates interests in some teams, like the Boys. Of course, the Lions are also televised every T-day and since they stink, they're still not one of the most profitbale teams. It's good for all of us, otherwise there wouldn't be any Cardinals to beat up on or the aformentioned Lions.

You're asusming that the TE is close, like a in an orange or brown formation, where the TE is going to get jammed. The new TE may or may not be there as is the case more frequently or there's a two TE set, but in that case your often talking run anyway. Throwing into areas where there's always 3 or sometimes 4 is precarious , look at Dallas Clark against the Pats, look at the Eagles TE against the Pats, not huge games. It's not a right or wrong thing, but the 4-3 is a long trend and the strategies for defending it are well established and well practiced in this league. Other trends to contend with: recieving FB.

scheme depends on personnel and with a given roster, that's what dictates your play. So with that, we're not equipped for the 3-4, however it is a fine system (not a strategy or tactic) for creating confusion. Since these systems go in trends, they can be more or less difficult depending on the trend at the time. Currently, it's back in vogue, however, it's been a round for a while. Never the less, a strategy for forcing a team to pass would be a d gameplan and a tactic would be blitzing, double teaming, and switching coverages. So, thanks for supposing that I wouldn't know the difference, but this isn't the cowboys first rodeo. Never the less, I think that the 3-4 is a superior system because of it's flexibility and with the advent of the TE as a power receiving threat (Gonzalez, Gates, Shock) then the middle and short field becomes a wide open target that is more difficult to navigate around the 3-4.

I tend to agree that with Strah and Osi, we won't be changing any time soon, but I do like the 3-4 better. I think it creates more flexibility and confusion just behind the line. I also like the blitzing options which are difficult in the 4-3, someone's coming free from and it's more a gamble (IMO)

towards a 3-4? We seem stuck in the 4-3 and yes, I know we don't have the personnel. I think that it's a worthwhile effort, but of course, we lack almost all the personnel for it. I suppose if you can't keep 3 Lb's healthy, then 4 is a lofty goal. I like the 3-4 for it's confusion. Thoughts?

I like the fact that we have change in our coaching. I think that TL has had a problem with his secondary in Pitts as well as here, so change is good

Martin, this is a big leap, he's constantly hurt and that's on thing that TC hates most. I'd say he's goner unless he cost $1.25

I like Jacobs, but I doubt he's the answer in a league that's trending towards, smaller faster backs.

lots to prove, may just be too tall. I would throw to him in the flats moving ahead and see what a head of steam would mean for CB's just trying to cut him.

hmmmm

Good, maybe we'll find our own Kurt Warner story.