Raven's Defense

**DavidF** · 05-18-2013, 12:04 PM

All the talk about the defense seems to assume a 3-4. I feel that the Ravens have primed themselves for a change to a 4-3 with the additions of Canty, Spears, and Brandon Williams, along with Ngata, Jones, and Cody. The combination of Ngata and Brandon Williams together in middle would be a nightmare for offensive lines, like what the Ravens had in their earlier Super Bowl win under Brian B. In fact, I think this duo could be better. Meanwhile, a 4-3 alignment would require only one starting inside linebacker - Arthur Brown. With Ngata and Williams clogging the line, it would be difficult for blockers to reach Brown, just as was the case for Ray Lewis with the earlier 4-3, allowing the middle backer to roam sideline to sideline. Add to this, outstanding outside backers and a very quick group of d-backs. This would be a major upgrade for the "D" from last year.

**Ravenswintitle** · 05-18-2013, 12:09 PM

They certainly could show more 4-3 fronts; they brought in Spagnuolo and he's always ran a 4-3 with heavy blitz packages. I'm sure he's here for a reason.

**jonboy79** · 05-18-2013, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by DavidF

All the talk about the defense seems to assume a 3-4. I feel that the Ravens have primed themselves for a change to a 4-3 with the additions of Canty, Spears, and Brandon Williams, .

I'm not sure why you see this, all 3 of these additions, PLUS Dumerville are ALL more suited to the 3-4...

In fact, I can't think of ONE PLAYER in our front 7 that is more suited to the 4-3 then the 3-4... Not a single one.

**wickedsolo** · 05-18-2013, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

I'm not sure why you see this, all 3 of these additions, PLUS Dumerville are ALL more suited to the 3-4...

In fact, I can't think of ONE PLAYER in our front 7 that is more suited to the 4-3 then the 3-4... Not a single one.

Chris Canty.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

**leachisabeast** · 05-18-2013, 12:26 PM

You say you only need one ILB to play the 4-3. but where are your two OLBs coming from? Josh Bynes, Jameel McClain, Albert McClellan, they are all ILBs. Its going to be a hybrid 3-4, but the base defense will be 3-4. I expect Ngata, Williams, and Canty to be the dline, while Jameel and Art Brown will play ILB together, with Sizzle, Dumervile, and Upshaw rotating on the edges.

**wickedsolo** · 05-18-2013, 12:26 PM

I dont think Spags means more 4-3, but it could mean that they will develop some more unique fronts and run hybrid schemes.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

**leachisabeast** · 05-18-2013, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

Chris Canty.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

Nah, he played better in the 3-4 in Dallas then he did in the 4-3 in NY (although he was still pretty solid for the Giants). His natural position is LE in a 3-4 front IMO.

**wickedsolo** · 05-18-2013, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

You say you only need one ILB to play the 4-3. but where are your two OLBs coming from? Josh Bynes, Jameel McClain, Albert McClellan, they are all ILBs. Its going to be a hybrid 3-4, but the base defense will be 3-4. I expect Ngata, Williams, and Canty to be the dline, while Jameel and Art Brown will play ILB together, with Sizzle, Dumervile, and Upshaw rotating on the edges.

Bynes as an ILB and Brown would be a great candidate for a weak side linebacker. Suggs or McClellan could be strong side linebacker.

Everyone thinks that the Ravens dont have the personnel to run a 4-3, but I strongly disagree.

RE - Dumerville, Simon
DT - Jones, Canty, Spears
NT - Ngata, Williams, Cody
LE - Upshaw, McPhee

SLB - Suggs, McClellan
MLB - Bynes, McClain
WLB - Brown, Carr

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

**jonboy79** · 05-18-2013, 01:33 PM

I don't see upshaw fitting in as an End at all, nor do I see Suggs playing LBer in a 4-3. Canty is MUCH beter in a 3-4 at End then 4-3 at DT.

We would have to play SUggs and Dumerville at End, despite that Dumerville showed he is better as an outside back er in the 3-4 and Suggs I think also fits in that same boat.

I could see McLellan as a strong-side backer, and Art Brown obviously could play weakside, but I jsut don't see this at all as utilizing strengths... Not even close. It's forcinga square peg in a round hole, when, IMO a square hole is also inherently better.

I really dont get why people are obsessed with the 4-3, when IMO, the 3-4 as I said is an inherently better defensive formation. The ONLY benefit to a 4-3, IMO is when you can CONSTANLTY get pressure from a 4 man front, with no need to blitz. Even then, I think the option to rush either of the 2 OLB'ers still proivides enough trickery to make it better.

The 3-4, as we run it, with 3 DT type players makes it a FAR stouter D agaisnthe run then any 4-3 allignment I have seen. With pass-rush pressure more disguised, it seems better to me in that aspect as well.

**Ravenswintitle** · 05-18-2013, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

I dont think Spags means more 4-3, but it could mean that they will develop some more unique fronts and run hybrid schemes.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

I agree and depending on circumstance they can always show a 4 man front, which is nothing new. With the more mobile QBs in the league, I'd think 3-4 would be better suited to keep some speed on the field.

**GOTA** · 05-18-2013, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

I agree and depending on circumstance they can always show a 4 man front, which is nothing new. With the more mobile QBs in the league, I'd think 3-4 would be better suited to keep some speed on the field.

A lot of 4-3 teams have been trying to get tall, lanky and fast defensive ends because of exactly what you wrote. You could see it in the premium that was paid for Dion Jordan and Ziggy Ansah. If you don't have that kind of player you are better off with the extra linebacker.

**wickedsolo** · 05-18-2013, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

I don't see upshaw fitting in as an End at all, nor do I see Suggs playing LBer in a 4-3. Canty is MUCH beter in a 3-4 at End then 4-3 at DT.

We would have to play SUggs and Dumerville at End, despite that Dumerville showed he is better as an outside back er in the 3-4 and Suggs I think also fits in that same boat.

I could see McLellan as a strong-side backer, and Art Brown obviously could play weakside, but I jsut don't see this at all as utilizing strengths... Not even close. It's forcinga square peg in a round hole, when, IMO a square hole is also inherently better.

I really dont get why people are obsessed with the 4-3, when IMO, the 3-4 as I said is an inherently better defensive formation. The ONLY benefit to a 4-3, IMO is when you can CONSTANLTY get pressure from a 4 man front, with no need to blitz. Even then, I think the option to rush either of the 2 OLB'ers still proivides enough trickery to make it better.

The 3-4, as we run it, with 3 DT type players makes it a FAR stouter D agaisnthe run then any 4-3 allignment I have seen. With pass-rush pressure more disguised, it seems better to me in that aspect as well.

Thinking that the Ravens could run a 4-3 if they wanted now equates to being obsessed with the 4-3? Exaggeration much?

I think most here realize what each player's strengths are and if they had to or wanted to, they could run a base 4-3.

As it stands now, Dean Pees is a pretty traditional 3-4 guy with pressure from the two OLB's. So, I dont think they will run many 4-3 fronts, but they could.

Frankly, I like the 3-4. I think it is much more versatile than the 3-4 as long as the team has two good pass rushers, which with Dumervil, we do.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner