Well, while I'll admit up front that I don't know how all the schemes inter-relate, I think we've got good personnel (assuming Jenkins comes back and we can find a new guy to fill KGB's role) to run a scheme like the Eagles and Giants run. For one, we've got the personnel in the secondary to man-up on the WRs and free the LB corps and a safety to attack the ball. For another, we've got very good team speed.
"all_about_da_packers" wrote:
The Packers employ a 4-3 cover 1 (man-to-man press), and other 4-3 variants include cover 2 (Tampa 2), Cover 3, and quarters.
The Eagles and Giants employ a much more diverse style of 4-3, meaning they mix up their coverages from cover 1, quarters, cover 3, etc. The Packers differ mainly because they employ almost exclusively cover 1, and some quarters coverage.
The premise of the 4-3 D, whether it's cover 1/2/3/quarters is that you have a d-line that gets pressure on the QB. The coverage in turn is supposed to give you the extra time to get to the QB, giving the QB no immediate check downs in the face of coming pressure.
Regardless of us changing from Cover 1 to any other 4-3 scheme, we're going to struggle because we lack the fundamental necessity; we don't have a decent pass rush. Our d-line is a weakness, and that's a major no-no 4-3 scheme.
"ILikeThePackers39" wrote: