So am I correct in thinking that if we get a DC that likes to run the 3-4 that it would set us back even further on defense than we are now? Are there any DC's that we are pursuing that DO run a 3-4? I just can't imagine us wanting to get replace the semi-decent D-line we are building for emphasis on linebackers.

Also, I know I have already asked a lot of questions, but are there any SEC teams that do run a 3-4?

Most secw teams run a 4-2-5 with a safety in the box fwiw.

We would have to shift our recruiting strategy on defense if we went to a 3-4. It would just be Snyder all over again, have to give the DC a couple years before getting the right personnel for a 3-4. Do not want. 4-3 works very well at any level of football when run with proper fundamentals consistently. Or as above poster said, 4-2-5 also works.

We don't have the lbs to run a 3-4. If we did go after a 3-4 guy we couldn't even run it the first year or two. Also why would you want to bury your best defensive player in the middle of the line.

If A&M hired one of the premium D-coordinators that we are rumored to be targeting, I think everybody would expect a pretty significant step forward from where we've been recently regardless of them changing schemes. When you are near the bottom in any phase of the game, a change shouldn't set you back. No one should expect a complete turnaround in one year, but I think you should be able to see significant improvement in year 1.

quote:

---

We don't have the lbs to run a 3-4. If we did got after a 3-4 guy we couldn't even run it the first year or two. Also why would you want to bury your best defensive player in the middle of the line.

---

Some guy from the Texans says hello.

Garrett does not equal JJ Watt

quote:

---

Also, I know I have already asked a lot of questions, but are there any SEC teams that do run a 3-4?

---

Bama runs a base 3-4 and they have the LB depth to run it properly.

quote:

---

We don't have the lbs to run a 3-4. If we did got after a 3-4 guy we couldn't even run it the first year or two. Also why would you want to bury your best defensive player in the middle of the line.

---

Correct

3-3-5 all the way

5-5-5

-Zidoit

IMHO, the change is harder for the DL. They aren't expected to tackle in the 3-4. Instead they must occupy blockers to allow lbs to tackle. Totally different philosophy in run defense and requires a different type of player. Difficult transition for sure.

I like the 3-4, but only if you've got the players to make it happen, which we don't. If we went to a 3-4, I'd see Myles Garret more as a linebacker than a lineman. We'd also need some serious size infusion real quick to make it work.

Can someone please explain to me why we don't line up in the punt return formation every play?

The other team literally punts 98% of the time we use that formation.

Dumbest idea ever. You know how I know you didn't watch the Arkansas game?

quote:

---

I like the 3-4, but only if you've got the players to make it happen, which we don't. If we went to a 3-4, I'd see Myles Garret more as a linebacker than a lineman. We'd also need some serious size infusion real quick to make it work.

---

We don't even have one Mike on our roster a 3-4 just means twice the liabilty.

quote:

---

5-5-5

-Zidoit

---

i like this idea... SEC might feel bad for all our defensive woes and let us field 15 if we petition... right?

We don't have the personnel for a 3-4. Hell, we had trouble fielding 3 LBs. And very few HS DLs want to become NGs and get double-teamed every play. Against run heavy Os, it also, essentially, gives up, minimum 2 yards.

We need a 4-3, or 4-2-5.