Listening to the radio many are calling in saying we should get Romeo Crennel because we have better LB's than DL players.

My question is, are we closer to having a 4-3 or 3-4 scheme? Also, what scheme did Ted Thompson play in, was that 3-4 or 4-3?

---

We overall have better talent fits in a 4-3 verses a 3-4... Jenkins could play DE in a 3-4 without much issue.. Kampman might be undersized to man the spot.. the rest of the DE on roster.. none really fit the mold of a 3-4 end.

At DT.. Pickett and or Jolly might be stout enough to adapt to the nose.. but based on the way they handled doubles this year.. probably not overly productive fits.. Cole and the remainder of the DT's probably isn't a match for a base 3-4 either..

At Backer.. we don't have the natural inside size for the interior backers and have about 4 deep at outside.. so we would either have to change the core of the the backers or play undersized guys inside that have already shown they can't shed blocks.. something a 3-4 backers absolutely must have ability at.. the oline gets deeper into the defense within a 3-4 scheme.. backers have to shed and flow productively.. this year we know they can't.

Some of the variations in pass coverage that a 3-4 allows would be fun to watch.. but we were a soft team against the run within a 4-3... think that we will be able to become stouter with a weakened run defense of a 3-4 scheme?

We have the personnel tailored for a 4-3 at this point.. as far as the defense that Ted played in.. not really sure.

---

I think we're very close to a 3-4. We would need a dominant NT though and I'm not sure about the blitzing ability of our LBs. The only LB I've seen blitzing really good has been Bishop in his limited playing time.

As for the 4-3. Our LBs are one of the better coverage guys in the league imo. Especially when we have Chillar out there. Our defense is just one good pash rusher away from being dominant again. Maybe switch Cullen to the middle from time to time and we will be able to stop the run quite good aswell. (We'll need taht in the NFC North).

There's something to say about both schemes. I personally like the 3-4, just because of all the blitzes etc. A creative 4-3 would be good to though, we just need a change from the rigid defense we have right now.

As for the Thompson question, I could find some footage from the 1978 Oilers. You see them playing with 3 D-lineman and 4 LBs. Also, you can see the starting defensive line-up at 2:30-3:00

I just don't think we have the right players on the roster for a 3-4.
I'd have to vote that we stick to a 4-3 and only upgrade a couple of players rather than change to a whole new scheme which I think would require a major roster change to make it work.

4-3 without a major overhaul.

But it really doesn't matter. Crennel was the DC in NE when they ran a 4-3 so he knows how it works.

---

For the moment (no new players via FA or anything), I agree w/ those that say we don't have the horses for a 3-4. I do like that scheme, because when it's run well it's very flexible, but I just don't know that we have the right talent to run it, esp. on the D line.

---

4-3. If you think our run D is sad now, you would be bawling watching us try to stop the run in a 3-4.

---

I believe this would be a huge error. Every playere would have to learn a new roll and some would fit and some will not. This would require retooling and putting an NFL quality and playoff caliber defense on the field before next year starts. Big risk.

There's much more to employing the 3-4 than just having four decent LB's and rolling with it.

As mentioned above the goal here is to put a playoff and SB quality defense on the field. IMO a team reloads when they are prepared to essentially start from scratch and build from the ground up.

I do not believe the Packers are in that place at this point and would rather see them fix the pass rush problem which would go a long ways to improving the numbers on defense and by no means requires an overhaul of the defense.

If teams could just switch to the 3-4 and go to the SB the following year I would imagine everybody would be doing it. Besides there's no big difference in numbers between teams that are good at the 3-4 and the ones good in a 4-3.

The key is being good at whatever it is you go with and I would be anxious to see how much better this "D" would be with a solid pass rush than I would to see them change the whole defense around.

---

I agree!!!!!!!!!!!

If we made a run at a Quailty lb like Terrell Suggs i would like to see the Packers go to the 3-4. I love the flexabilty it gives your lb's and the blitz pagkages look to have many more options.

---