Insite into Trestmans thought on 3-4 defense

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BSBEARS, Feb 11, 2014.

  1. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    689
    Ratings:
    +919 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,081ß
  2. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,940
    Likes Received:
    2,612
    Ratings:
    +3,021 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,721ß
    From that article it seems like Trestman, from an offense perspective, considers an opposing 3-4 defense more challenging than a 4-3. If he ultimately would like to have a 3-4 defense in Chicago, then this would be a rare opportunity for him to make the switch, due to the fact there will be a number of key roster changes on D anyway. It may not be so easy to switch in other years. If he wants a 3-4 or 3-4 hybrid, then this is his chance.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    689
    Ratings:
    +919 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,081ß
    Pretty much my take as well:5_5_1[1]:
  4. JJ-30

    JJ-30 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    117
    Ratings:
    +167 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    57ß
    Have to agree with both of you. Since we are retooling the Defense this would seem to as good a time as any.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. mshu7

    mshu7 Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    75
    Ratings:
    +96 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    82ß
    Agreed. Do it now, or forever hold your peace!
  6. VJ18

    VJ18 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2013
    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ratings:
    +83 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    28ß
    agreed with you guys, i mean how much worse could we be from last year? ha
  7. billatter

    billatter Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    253
    Likes Received:
    212
    Ratings:
    +268 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    127ß
    I like the defensive perspective, of "what scheme is hard to play against" vs. "I like this scheme best, because I'm the boss". I like the 3-4 because of the creativity it offers the DC. The 3-4 is a situational D up here, but because the front seven are so big in the NFL, I can see it as an "almost every down' D. My preference is for a hybrid that plays mostly 3-4, but will happily switch to a 4-3 when the O finds a way to exploit a 3-4 weakness, or when it makes sense for the situation (i.e. third and long, send four on the rush and have two LBs and a hybrid dropping in coverage). I've always favoured schemes that have the flexibility to counter or exploit the opposition, rather than the simplistic, plough ahead regardless mentality.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. jackiejokeman

    jackiejokeman Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    172
    Ratings:
    +224 / 2 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    606ß
    We seem to have enough LB's to get a 3-4 defense going. Get a NT type and a DL,and then go secondary. Not in that order,BPA at each pick.

Share This Page