(02-12-2019, 01:50 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: But we don't even have 3 Capable LBers  and now will need 4 lol

LB doesn’t mean the same thing in a 3-4, OLB and ILB are distinctly different. Hubbard and Lawson could play OLB fine. Vigil would be a serviceable weak side MLB and you draft a Mike.

(02-12-2019, 01:49 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Meh..... I like the 4-3, we have our personnel picked for that defense. No reason to change....

Really, our defensive line and secondary are good.

It's the LB's that are terrible.

Fix LB and we're probably a Top 10 defense again.

(02-12-2019, 01:49 PM)Synric Wrote: Ideal 2 gap 34 ends. In that kinda defense they need the size and length to stack and shed. In a single gap 34 you need ends that can get leverage and penetrate. The Steelers run 2 gap almost exclusively.

Geno Atkins has lined up alot more than people think as a 34 end so has MJ and Carlos Dunlap. People are stuck on the 34 and 43 as a base but those are just alignments. In fact there's a few different 43 and 34 alignments examples like 43 under/over 43 flex 43 wide nine. 

What is more important is the gap responsibilities and even then teams mix up those responsibilities too. Look at alot of zone blitzes the Bengals have run over the years alot of that is 2 gap front.

Please don’t add MJ to any conversation. They tried him initially at Lab n he failed. Dunlap is not a 3 4 end. We just don’t have the personnel

(02-12-2019, 02:29 PM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: Please don’t add MJ to any conversation.  They tried him initially at Lab n he failed.  Dunlap is not a 3 4 end. We just don’t have the personnel

This topic gets discussed EVERY YEAR and it never seems like a good idea to me.

(02-12-2019, 02:29 PM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: Please don’t add MJ to any conversation.  They tried him initially at Lab n he failed.  Dunlap is not a 3 4 end. We just don’t have the personnel

Did you know 43 ends line up in the exact same spot as a 34 DE depending on alignment?

Did you know 43 ends line up in the exact same spot as 34 OLBs depending on alignment? (One with their hand in the dirt other standing).

Even if Atkins and Dunlap could play 3-4 DE and Hubbard and Lawson could play 3-4 OLB -- and I think they probably could -- you still need a NT and at least one ILB who can cover. I don't think we have either on our roster at the moment.

(02-12-2019, 02:42 PM)Synric Wrote: Did you know 43 ends line up in the exact same spot as a 34 DE depending on alignment?

Did you know 43 ends line up in the exact same spot as 34 OLBs depending on alignment? (One with their hand in the dirt other standing).

did you know is a 34 Dunlap would have to cover TEs?

(02-12-2019, 02:21 PM)bengals67 Wrote: Don't the Pats, Steelers and Ravens run a 3-4.

The question is not what is best for next year- what is best for the future given the pass happy NFL?

Not to mention that Bengals were in the bottom of the league defending the run with a 4-3.

They are not winning anything next year. This team is a project. And it is about time.

Everything assumption and tendency needs to be challenged.

Most run some sort of Hybrid 3-4/4-3 scheme

(02-12-2019, 02:22 PM)Au165 Wrote: LB doesn’t mean the same thing in a 3-4, OLB and ILB are distinctly different. Hubbard and Lawson could play OLB fine. Vigil would be a serviceable weak side MLB and you draft a Mike.

Oh I know....   It could help or hurt them....    They might be able to play OLB fine with their hand in the dirt but standing up? in coverage?

(02-12-2019, 03:27 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Oh I know....   It could help or hurt them....    They might be able to play OLB fine with their hand in the dirt but standing up? in coverage?

...that is the entire point. The backside rush LB is basically just a defensive end who is standing, something Lawson did occasionally at Auburn. You could even ask him to spot drop in a zone on occasion if you liked. As for Hubbard your asking him to cover very minimally (mainly flat routes and hook zones with a very rare man look). I saw Hubbard run with Joe Mixon in training camp 30 yards down field in man so I think he can make it work. 

(02-12-2019, 03:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...that is the entire point. The backside rush LB is basically just a defensive end who is standing, something Lawson did occasionally at Auburn. You could even ask him to spot drop in a zone on occasion if you liked. As for Hubbard your asking him to cover very minimally (mainly flat routes and hook zones with a very rare man look). I saw Hubbard run with Joe Mixon in training camp 30 yards down field in man so I think he can make it work. 

then if we go that route I expect the biggest DT available early.

(02-12-2019, 03:32 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: then if we go that route I expect the biggest DT available early.

Billings can play NT. 

(02-12-2019, 03:24 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: did you know is a 34 Dunlap would have to cover TEs?

Only if he's given that responsibility which would be the defensive coordinators job not to make that mistake.

Look at JJ Watt...Sometimes he's a 34 end sometimes a 43 end sometimes he's technically a 34 OLB but what he is all the time is the strong side edge defender.

Going to a 3-4 is risky but a lot more possibilities.

(02-12-2019, 03:33 PM)Au165 Wrote: Billings can play NT. 

He struggles playing DT in a 3-4. When there are 2 guys blocking him, he's going to really struggle.

(02-12-2019, 03:51 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: He struggles playing DT in a 3-4. When there are 2 guys blocking him, he's going to really struggle.

He was playing the nose in a 4-3 but playing heads up over the center (most 3-4) versus a 0 shade is different.  We can still shade him in various 3-4 fronts. In my mind he'd be fine, but as always if there are other options throughout the draft I'm open. You historically don't draft 3-4 NT before the late 2nd or 3rd round because it's not really a "money" position. 

(02-12-2019, 03:30 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...that is the entire point. The backside rush LB is basically just a defensive end who is standing, something Lawson did occasionally at Auburn. You could even ask him to spot drop in a zone on occasion if you liked. As for Hubbard your asking him to cover very minimally (mainly flat routes and hook zones with a very rare man look). I saw Hubbard run with Joe Mixon in training camp 30 yards down field in man so I think he can make it work. 

Have you seen Lawson drop into coverage or zone . My god it’s brutal. Yes he’s that bad. He would be great at rushing the QB or the edge and that’s all.

I want to go to a 3 4 defense but I know we need two years to get there personel wise.

(02-12-2019, 02:21 PM)bengals67 Wrote: Don't the Pats, Steelers and Ravens run a 3-4.

The question is not what is best for next year- what is best for the future given the pass happy NFL?

Not to mention that Bengals were in the bottom of the league defending the run with a 4-3.

They are not winning anything next year. This team is a project. And it is about time.

Everything assumption and tendency needs to be challenged.

The Pats run whatever their scheme for that week calls for. In 2018 they ran anything from 2 down linemen to 5 and I'm not talking about special case scenarios like goal line stands, but as a regular look.

Against the Vikings this year they ran 2-5. In the SB against the Rams on 1st and 2nd down they were lining up 5 guys (one over each offensive linemen) to take away double teams the Rams like to use in their running game.

Here's a couple of links:

https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/masters-disguise-patriots-defense-mystifies-cousins-vikings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLmyRYJHt4o

(02-12-2019, 03:51 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: He struggles playing DT in a 3-4. When there are 2 guys blocking him, he's going to really struggle.

He had a PFF grade of 74.9.  There might be a bit of a false narrative going on about him.  And he's still very young.