A lot of truth in this. Rather than nickel being a 3rd and long solution, more teams are opting for the extra DB on the field quite often - which is not surprising with modern offensive philosophy.
I feel that the 4-3 has become outdated and doesn't stack up well against a modern offense. If we went to a 4-3 I would imagine our opponents would just use their TE more and destroy the middle of the field even more than they do now (if that is possible.)
The bottom line though - you have to find a way to put your best players on the field. With our current situation Dom needs to find ways to generate a pass rush to help the banged up secondary. I don't see us improving in that category with that change (but I have been wrong before.)
Originally Posted by: hardrocker950
I decided not to add my opinion in the last post, but I was thinking about talking about some of the hybrid systems.. specifically stating that I clearly prefer the 3-4 concepts. Even in a 4-3 design. The two teams I've noticed first do 3-4 concepts in the 4-3 design the were the Seahawks and Broncos.
The Seahawks with Pete Carroll's first year... ran a 4-3 system where they moved NT Red Bryant to 4-3 DE. Bryant was basically a five technique 3-4 using his run clogging skills like a NT would... and simply blitzed their OLB to that side a lot. So it was basically a 3-4 system, where the ROLB had his hand in the dirt every single play.... I couldn't help but think the Packers should of used Kampman like that (but on the left side). I'm not sure if the Seahawks still run this style defense or not... I think they might of moved away from it... but I'm not sure.
And the Broncos are now in a 3-4 defense... but note long ago, I swear their depth chart had a 4-3 design... with Von Miller as a 4-3 OLB and DeMarcus Ware as a 4-3 DE... but they still used a 3-4 concept with that, as Von Miller would surely be blitzing heavily.
I've wondered if the Packers could use a 4-3 system design with 3-4 concepts like the Broncos did...