Has anyone else been hearing that the defense will be using Base 4-3 less often?
I certainly hope so. I’d rather have Barnes as the WLB and occasionally bring in Nowaske to be SLB.
If true, what are your thoughts on it?
Based on current personnel, we can barely scrape together 4 d-linemen, or 3 lbers.
1 Like
There’s a lot of truth to that.
OMG please yes. PLEASE.
3 Likes
I’d bet a lot of money we had 3 backers on the field so much to justify paying Barnes
1 Like
Ladies and gentleman, prepare for a new modern secondary focused defense. We call it the 3-2-6…except on 3rd downs when Barnes comes off and it becomes a 3-1-7!!! 
1 Like
And I’m joking but honestly if you could field a team behind the line of folks who have corner level speed, can cover like a corner, yet tackle like a linebacker…so a team of corners and safeties who tackle like linebackers and a front 3 who clog the line of scrimmage (which Jack as your one LB), that really could be an unstoppable defense.
We had that. And they moved him to Safety. Hasn’t been the same since. That was Brian Branch. Didn’t like the move then, has been proven to be bad now.
We ran a lot of base 4-3 out of necessity.
To run subpackages you need multiple DB’s a good slot CB or a LBer who can cover.
AA is gone because we’re looking for a replacement who can cover.
I think the Lions want to run less base but they haven’t had enough personnel options to do so.
2 Likes
Base Nickel?
3 Likes
They ran a lot of base because of injuries AND because they had a first time DC.
Bottom 5 in sub packages.
And because out DC former LB and LB coach. He likes his LBs. So he likes 3LB sets.
At a certain point you have to actually put a package out there that matches up with the offense. So what if your boy Barns has to come off the field. Hard to cover 4 WR sets with only 4 DBs.
1 Like
2-2-7 incoming
2 Likes
I for one have a long history of Base Less claims and posts, and am glad to see some of you come around to my way of thinking.
1 Like
Now maybe we adapt the scheme, but we usually ask the Will backer to cover tight ends a ton and Barnes struggles in coverage. Doesn’t seem like a good plan IMO
A linebacker who can cover is one of the biggest holes on the current roaster.
1 Like
I’m thinking the Barnes extension was a mistake. A two-fold mistake.
First, Shep is the one who asked for it.
Second, Brad consented.
2 Likes
Also, another reason why they ran so much base defense last year. Because they absolutely were atrocious against the run.
Do we not remember that Pittsburgh ran 200 yards down our throat?
It’s always interesting to me how high leverage games dramatically impact
perception as opposed to the total sample.