Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Are the Colts' personnel better suited for a base 4-3 DEF?


Recommended Posts

I expect the Colts to draft at least a few defensive players in this years draft, so our personnel could definitely change before opening day. I know and realize we use a hybrid, multiple look front and utilize the 4-3 already in our defensive play calling. But our defense is generally referred to as a base 3-4.

But we don't really have ideal players at NT, pass rusher or ILB to run a "perfect" 3-4 set. Alot of our players have a background in playing 4-3. So here is a look at our defensive depth chart as a 4-3 front.

DEs: Robert Mathis, Trent Cole, Jonathan Newsome, Bjoern Werner, Zach Kerr

DTs: Arthur Jones, Kendall Langford, Josh Chapman, Montori Hughes, Kelcey Quarles

LBs: Erik Walden, Dqwell Jackson, Jerrell Freeman, Nate Irving, Andy Studebaker, Daniel Adongo, Josh McNary

What do you think? Does this make our current DEF look any better? Worse? Obviously this would have little to no effect on our CBs or Safeties...so I am talking about front seven personnel only.

Link to post
Share on other sites

me either but I want a REAL 3-4 that's mean like the 49ers had and BAL

 

I like our base hybrid, but would like to see our outside linebackers play off the line more often to show some different looks.

 

I feel as though it is too easy to game plan against us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think Woody Hayes of OSU had one of the better defenses, a 5-3-4 but was penalized on it! Think this was the game in which he was suspended for grabbing an opposing player!

 

He was probably penalized for having 12 men on the field...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot it gets asked about every week....

I've been a member here since Jan, haven't seen anyone post it. We run 4-3 sets as it is, so I dont see why it is out of the realm of possibility but it seems like my opinion is an unpopular one regarding this subject. I just think simpler alignments in our defensive front could go a long way when it comes to the production of our defensive players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Colts do run a 4-3 at times. The opposing team dictates that. Hybrid should be able to go either way depending on the offense they are facing. With a base 3-4 we still need better run stoppers out of the linebackers. It was hit and miss last season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

freeman is possibly better suited for a 4-3

 

walden would be worse and probably not have a role at all.

 

its hard to say with werner he seems like a 3-4  strong side olb more than anything else to me

 

i dont think it matters for mathis and cole

 

the guys you listed at DT are all 3-4 by nature but that postion is not hard to switch between bases if necessary

 

i think newsome could be decent at 4-3 weak side

Link to post
Share on other sites

He was probably penalized for having 12 men on the field...

Yes in his interview Coach Woody made comments to his 5-3-4 defense and the penalty. I can't remember his remarks but it was typical Woodyism!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel that if all of the pieces are there the 3-4 would be more dominant than the 4-3.

Must have the right personel though obviously! I really like the 3-4 the Colts just are not that great at it yet. Give them time, more 3-4 scheme players and a new D coordinator and they will be better! haha

Link to post
Share on other sites

freeman is possibly better suited for a 4-3

 

walden would be worse and probably not have a role at all.

 

its hard to say with werner he seems like a 3-4  strong side olb more than anything else to me

 

i dont think it matters for mathis and cole

 

the guys you listed at DT are all 3-4 by nature but that postion is not hard to switch between bases if necessary

 

i think newsome could be decent at 4-3 weak side

 

You had me and still had me, until you mentioned Newsome...

He was 236 during college days, bulked up to 251 or so...Jerry Hughes 2.0 to the max...extremely poor fit for the 4-3, even on passing downs only. With that size nowadays, you get engulfed by OTs that outweigh you by 75+ lbs going 1 vs 1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a member here since Jan, haven't seen anyone post it. We run 4-3 sets as it is, so I dont see why it is out of the realm of possibility but it seems like my opinion is an unpopular one regarding this subject. I just think simpler alignments in our defensive front could go a long way when it comes to the production of our defensive players.

it gets asked all the time. And before that when we ran the 4-3/Tampa 2 under Dungy, it was asked all the time to switch to a 3-4 base.

But to answer your question, I think it's far too late in the off season to switch majorly, you might see more 4-3 formations but we'll stay 3-4 Hybrid This season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

 

And for the record, I never want to go back to the 4-3. 

 

As long as it's not Polian's vision of the Tampa 2 with 250 pound DTs and undersized LBs, a 4-3 would be fine. 

 

A 4-3, 3-4 or this hybrid, it doesn't really matter.  We just need to find some play makers.  We haven't drafted one since Bob Sanders over a decade ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our problem (IMO) is that we lack a real superstar in the front 7, now that Mathis got injured and most likely won't be the player he once was. In order to be a dominant 3-4, we need an impact player at NT or ILB and we have neither.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We run a Multiple Hybrid front. Base defense is a 3-4 but also transitions into a 4-3. so we basically play both fronts during different situations.

 

Me personally i prefer the base 3-4 defense as opposed to the 4-3. But i do like the flexibility which allows us to switch between both fronts. 

 

With that being said i think we do have the personnel to plug and play a 4-3 front and be effective. But i want us to continue to build on the 3-4 defensive front.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

You had me and still had me, until you mentioned Newsome...

He was 236 during college days, bulked up to 251 or so...Jerry Hughes 2.0 to the max...extremely poor fit for the 4-3, even on passing downs only. With that size nowadays, you get engulfed by OTs that outweigh you by 75+ lbs going 1 vs 1.

jerry plays in a 4-3 now and is doing better than ever.  weakside olbs in a 4-3 dont need to be all that big, von miller is 250 and plays that role very well

Link to post
Share on other sites

You had me and still had me, until you mentioned Newsome...

He was 236 during college days, bulked up to 251 or so...Jerry Hughes 2.0 to the max...extremely poor fit for the 4-3, even on passing downs only. With that size nowadays, you get engulfed by OTs that outweigh you by 75+ lbs going 1 vs 1.

 

They said the same thing about Mathis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as it's not Polian's vision of the Tampa 2 with 250 pound DTs and undersized LBs, a 4-3 would be fine. 

 

A 4-3, 3-4 or this hybrid, it doesn't really matter.  We just need to find some play makers.  We haven't drafted one since Bob Sanders over a decade ago. 

Two things are wrong with this post:

 

Polian won a SB with that "vision" and got to another one.

 

Two, do people not realize the role of a GM?  A GM does not draft players and tell the coach...make this guy work in your scheme.  The coach gives the GM the attributes he thinks for each position, then the coach and the GM sit down and assign a weight to each attribute.  The GM then grades players on each attribute, applies the weight to the attribute grades and comes up with an overall player grade.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious as to why.

 

I believe that the 3-4 offers more flexibility to be creative, especially with blitzing. I like the idea of having 4 athletic linebackers on the field, instead of occasionally dropping DE's into coverage. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Initially, I was all for the 3-4.  When it was announced and with Pagano as HC, I was expecting to see a lot of creativity, like Baltimore in their glory days, Pittsburgh and NE back in the day.  Instead, I see a very vanilla type of defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two things are wrong with this post:

 

Polian won a SB with that "vision" and got to another one.

 

Two, do people not realize the role of a GM?  A GM does not draft players and tell the coach...make this guy work in your scheme.  The coach gives the GM the attributes he thinks for each position, then the coach and the GM sit down and assign a weight to each attribute.  The GM then grades players on each attribute, applies the weight to the attribute grades and comes up with an overall player grade.

 

Multiple things are wrong with your post.  First you seemingly give Polian credit for that vision - bringing the Colts to two Super Bowls - then turn around and say it really wasn't his vision anyway.  Which is it?

 

Beyond that, the super small, slim lined version of the Indianapolis Tampa 2 differed from what you saw in Tampa or in Chicago with Lovie, and after following it for a decade, I would say, yes, Polian, not Dungy, was the driving force who brought the sleek Indianapolis version to a reality.  There was the Tampa 2, then there was the Indianapolis version of it.

 

Finally, I would say the Indianapolis 2, with DTs the size of LBs and LBs the size of DBs, kept us from more Super Bowls than it brought us.  There's a reason that defense is now resting on the ash heap of history. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple things are wrong with your post. First you seemingly give Polian credit for that vision - bringing the Colts to two Super Bowls - then turn around and say it really wasn't his vision anyway. Which is it?

I remember Polian saying he targetted under-sized defensive players because it allowed him to get players with a higher level of talent, while other GMs avoided drafting these small stature players in the early rounds. Undersized players could play the pass well but struggled against the run. The idea was that our high powered offense would force the other team to be more aggressive, abandon the run and it wouldnt expose our flaws. Sometimes it would work, sometimes we would give up 200-300 rushing yards and get dominated in time of possession.

Grigson and Pagano seem to value bigger players, but we still give up too many rushing yards and too often get dominated in time of possession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • According to Over The Cap the Colts will be paying Wentz 25.4 million in 2021, 22 million in 2022, 25 million in 2023 and 26 million in 2024.  The Eagles will be eating the pro rated bonus part of the contract. 
    • Clearly you are speaking to yourself in regards to wishing you had the time back that it took to reply to what we wrote... 
    • I’ll preface this by saying in Ballard’s 4 classes he’s drafted atleast 8 players in every draft and made multiple trades in all of them. We currently have 6 picks and I don't see us finishing the draft without 8-9 players selected, I wanted to have a purpose behind the trades I made and I tried to make the draft trades as realistic as possible for both teams   In-House: ($43.6m in cap) Restructuring Ryan Kelly - Saving $6.75m  Trade Jack Doyle to the Patriots for P155 - Saving $4.5m   Colts Free Agents: ($54.8m in cap) Xavier Rhodes - $16m/2 Justin Houston - $20m/2 TJ Carrie - $1m/1 Al-Quadin Muhammad - $3m/1 George Odum - $1m/1 Ashton Dulin - $540k/1 Zach Pascal - $2.2m/1 Mo Alie-Cox - $2.2m/1   Rhodes - Whether he re-signs or leaves I think we need to add 2 corners in the offseason, I don’t see Ballard letting him go unless he demands crazy $   Houston - I’m not the biggest fan of the edge class and I don’t think Ballard will pay big for any of the free agents DEs. Houston’s our best bet and was more productive last year than his stats show.   Free Agency: ($26.8m in cap)  Zach Ertz TE - $5m/1 Marvin Jones WR - $21m/2 James Hurst OT - $2.5m/1 Deatrich Wise DE $10m/2 Todd Davis LB - $1m/1   Ertz - Philly is likely to cut him, he’d be a favorite to land here and reunite with Frank and Wentz   Jones - Gives us room to address other needs in the draft, while filling a crucial need for a few years. Pittman, Jones, and Campbell can be fantastic, especially if PC breaks out and stays healthy.   Hurst - A cheap option to start at LT until our rookie takes over.   Wise - Would be filling the Autry role, giving us a rotational player that you can put anywhere on the DL.   Davis - LB competition and potential depth.   Trading 21 (800) to Baltimore for 27 + ‘22 2nd (around 820) Lamar gets a WR1 in Rashod Bateman   Trading 27 (680) to Dallas for 44 + 75 (675) Dallas gets much needed secondary help in Trevon Moehrig The Cowboys are a playoff team in position to jump back into the first round, rather than the rebuilding teams that have picks in early R2   Draft:  R2P44 - Greg Newsome II CB Northwestern R2P54 - Daviyon Nixon DT Iowa R3P75 - Patrick Jones DE Pittsburgh R4123 - Brady Christensen OT BYU R5155 (from NE) - Tamorrion Terry WR FSU R5162 - Divine Deablo LB/S Virginia Tech R6203 - Jermar Jefferson RB Oregon State R7243 - Brendan Jaimes OT Nebraska   Newsome - I think CB is still a need even if Rhodes returns. Newsome can play on both boundaries, off and press man, and is excellent in zone coverage. He’s one of my favorites in the entire class.   Nixon - Another one of my favorites in the draft. Nixon's insanely athletic at 300 lbs, is already a good run defender and I think his potential as an disruptive interior pass rusher is huge. Mixing him on a line with Houston, Buckner, and Stewart would be a much needed boost.   Jones - He’s an athletic freak at DE and another player whose pass rush upside is huge, and while I’m weary about the Colts developing pass rushers, I think Jones is someone they can take a risk on.   Christensen - I think Brady is going to be a draft riser, he’s got an incredible football IQ at the position, and only allowed one sack in 409 pass block snaps in 2020. He’ll need to improve his strength to handle the better DEs in the NFL but he’s got the potential to be a stonewall at the position for years.   Terry - He's 6'4" and has the perfect mix of speed, strength, burst, and agility. A playmaking downfield threat that I think has the ability to be a true WR2 on a team. He has issues with drops but if he can fix that, the ceiling as a WR is skyhigh.   Deablo - Versatility at LB/S, can contribute on ST   Jefferson - A quick change of pace back, would be the RB4 behind Wilkins.   Jaimes - Late round OL depth, PS candidate   
    • I think KVN is strictly a 3-4 OLB.   I don’t see him as a 4-3 DE.    He’s more of an “effort” guy and not a freaky athletic guy that Ballard is looking for. 
    • Looks like his deal was in the 12-13 million range.   He's still young.  20 lbs lighter than Houston.  Who we paid 10 million ish a yr IIRC   Maybe could bulk up, But I think Mathis played at about that weight (250) correct?   He had a pretty good 2020 season.      And like you said versatile.      I don't know.   Just seems like a Ballard move.  I'm not endorsing yet.  Just throwing it out there for opinions. SO thanks for the comment     
  • Members

    • Misty_B

      Misty_B 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Flash7

      Flash7 1,107

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • 427HR

      427HR 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • legend300

      legend300 63

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • crazycolt1

      crazycolt1 7,383

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • RDNScot

      RDNScot 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TheBlueAndWhite

      TheBlueAndWhite 75

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tvturner

      tvturner 283

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • danlhart87

      danlhart87 7,419

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 7,142

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...