[BostonCard]

Is there any reason we can't go to a 4-3, maximizing Thomas and Phillip's skills and bringing some of our surfeit of strong OLB's into play, or are we just stuck in the middle with a 3-4 mentality?

Just asking.

The reason we went from a 4-3 to a 3-4 initially was the difficulty in recruiting defensive tackles.  A 3-4 allows you to get by with one true NT, while in a 4-3, you need two DT's.  Of course, in a 3-4, you need oversized defensive ends, while a 4-3 would allow you to use a rush end that we currently employ as an OLB.  Still, it seems that we are able to recruit linebackers a bit easier than defensive linemen, so a 3-4 is probably a better match for us.

As someone else noted, we probably spend more snaps in a nickel than in the base offense, which reduces the impact of our dearth of defensive linemen.  We are doing fine in defensive backs and athletic linebackers.

BC

[BostonCard]

Is there any reason we can't go to a 4-3, maximizing Thomas and Phillip's skills and bringing some of our surfeit of strong OLB's into play, or are we just stuck in the middle with a 3-4 mentality?

Just asking.

The reason we went from a 4-3 to a 3-4 initially was the difficulty in recruiting defensive tackles.  A 3-4 allows you to get by with one true NT, while in a 4-3, you need two DT's.  Of course, in a 3-4, you need oversized defensive ends, while a 4-3 would allow you to use a rush end that we currently employ as an OLB.  Still, it seems that we are able to recruit linebackers a bit easier than defensive linemen, so a 3-4 is probably a better match for us.

As someone else noted, we probably spend more snaps in a nickel than in the base offense, which reduces the impact of our dearth of defensive linemen.  We are doing fine in defensive backs and athletic linebackers.

BC