As I said earlier, it's just an interesting thought experiment, especially considering how many Packers defensive players currently on the roster seem to be much better suited for a 4-3.
Re: the previous discussion, CM3 would be rushing from a DE/OLB position on obvious passing downs, regardless of whether he was standing or had a hand in the dirt in a 3-4 or 4-3 scheme. The only difference would be is that he would play more of a "rover" role, almost like Charles Woodson has done in the past on 1st and 2nd downs in a 4-3, depending on the situation. And at times, I'm sure he would still line up as a DE in base packages, as well. I wouldn't view that as much of a problem at all, and very well could be a good thing. He already does similar things now, especially against mobile QBs when spying. I'm not sure why some think it would limit his pass rushing opportunities at all, at least with a good coordinator. But as has been said, it's nothing more than something interesting to talk about in a long season, because it's not happening. Hopefully several of these other more prototypical 4-3 can make a better transition to a 3-4 defense next season though. Or better yet, we get more appropriate 3-4 personnel, especially DL and LBs.
Originally Posted by: doddpower
Some are, yes. On the second part, I know it wasn't aimed at my post, but that's why I made the Von Miller reference.
Anyway, I feel like Clay would be a good fit in a 4-3, as well, but you do have to build him in. He's not as natural a fit as he is in the 3-4, so I wouldn't say that he'd fit as well in both schemes.
Nick Perry looked like more of a 4-3 DE than a 3-4 OLB in college. His build, weigth, his play, everything pointed to him being drafted by a 4-3 team, so yes, I think he'd benefit from a switch to the 4-3.
People tend to say that your 3-4 DEs would be a better fit as 4-3 UTs, but why? I don't see why a guy like Neal or Daniels would benefit from a switch to the 4-3, all that much.
Maybe you could get away with playing Neal at LE, with Perry at RE, since Matthews gives you that extra rusher off the edge, but what are you really doing in that case?
You're playing with the exact same pieces, the exact same way, with the difference being that Perry puts his hand down, Matthews essentially plays the same role, apart from him having to drop in coverage more often, since you don't rush 5 every play, Neal still won't get to the QB all by himself, since he's build like a LE/UT tweener (Aka, 3-4 DE)...
And who do you take off at the MLB/OLB positions? Bishop certainly isn't an OLB. Go back to Hawk playing OLB? Undo all the work at ILB you did with D.J. Smith and put him back at OLB?
When all is said and done, our defense has a lot of players who could function in either defense, but would changing schemes at this point in time really help us? We got spoiled when we switched to the 3-4, putting up some good numbers, because usually a switch like this takes a couple of years to really start paying dividends.
We should just stick with the 3-4. Even though that doesn't have to be with Capers, as far as I'm concerned.