As soon as he got into Nolan's defense, his numbers were slashed.

"blueleopard" wrote:

There was possibly no other reason for that right?

Say, maybe, the D-Line of the Ravens was horrid, not being able to occupy enough blockers up front to leave the LBs open to make plays.

Nah, couldn't be. It must've all been Nolan's 3-4 scheme that was eerily similar to Marvin Lewis' 3-4 scheme before he left Baltimore. [/sarcasm]

"blueleopard" wrote:

Really?

In 1998, Nolan was DC of the Redskins, who finished 24th in the league in total defense.

In 1999, Nolan was still DC of the Redskins, who finished 30th in the league in total defense.

In 2002, Nolan was the DC of the Ravens, who finished 22nd in the league in total defense.

Hardly top line defense. Don't assume that a big name hire automatically equals success, especially since Nolan failed in San Fran.

That said, I'm really excited by this move, IMO it's all but official. Nolan is a tremendous talent, one who should provide continuity for a few years. He'll be a pleasant change from Sanders.

I just hope Nolan is good enough to adjust his scheme to the talent he inherits, and more importantly he is a good enough teacher to have success with his scheme.

"krazygangsta" wrote:

If we ran a 3-4, we should really look out for Terrell Suggs, Bart Scott and an NT. We would only use Hawk and Barnett from our current team as LBs. But the bad thing if we ran it is, does Aaron Kampman know how to play 3-4 DE or a rush OLB in 3-4?

Edit: Forgot to say, if anyone says getting both Scott and Suggs is absurd, I would point out that we have lots and lots of cap space.

"Packers_Finland" wrote: