Monday, January 5, 2009

Potential Sanders Replacements.

Silverstein has a great rundown of the potential replacements.  I'm not a huge fan of Gregg Williams or the 3-4 defense.  Regarding Williams, it just seems to me that there is always drama around that guy.  He was the heir apparent to Gibbs in Washington but then fell out of favor because of his confrontational style among other things (including a defense that finished 30th in the league a few years back).  Then he had his very public contract situation in Jacksonville during this season.  Maybe none of this stuff is his fault, but it sends some red flags.   

I also get the impression that Williams is looking to have one great season and bolt for a head coaching gig.  I don't begrudge anyone for having higher aspirations.  Indeed, unless we are talking about a grizzled old coordinator like Jim Johnson or Monte Kiffin, I'm not even sure that I would want a defensive coordinator that did not aspire to be a head coach.  That said, do we really want another one year mercenary like Jim Bates?  Honestly, the idea of a young up and coming coach like Winston Moss is growing on me.

I also cringe at the suggestion that the Packers should switch to the 3-4.  I understand that everyone is looking for a silver bullet.  I also understand that as a rule, it is easier to find good linebackers than good defensive linemen.  Still, the Packers used to run the 3-4 back in the eighties and it was no silver bullet.  I have a bias in favor of the 4-3 because that is the defense the Packers have run during the successful years.  I will always have negative associations with the 3-4.

Anyhow, its a bad a idea for a more practical reason.  Kampmen and Jenkins are two of the Packers better defenders and wouldn't fit the scheme.   Woodson is playing great now.  Al Harris is good now.  By the time the Packers had the personnel in place to run the 3-4, Woodson and Harris will likely be past their prime and perhaps long gone.  It just seems like the wrong time to engage in another lengthy rebuilding process.  

If you were Thompson and McCarthy and you were starting to feel the heat, how hot to trot would you be to engage in another roster rebuilding phase right now?  I think the 4-3 is safe for the time being.

3 comments:

  1. Finally found your blog DDD. I had heard you had one but had not seen it. Nice place.

    I have to agree the 3-4 leaves me wary.

    Again, nice place. Although your sidebar looks just a tiny tiny bit empty. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree with you. I personally would prefer a scheme like the Eagles are currently running. We have players in place for a 4-3 so I don't see the need to get rid of some of these players in order to switch to a 3-4. With the right coordinator and a couple of additions I think we could be a good team running a 4-3. If we switch to a 3-4 I see at least a couple average to below average seasons as the defense adjusts to the new scheme.

    Plus there is the fact that many teams will probably be switching to the 3-4 soon due to all the success lately with the scheme. In a couple of years there might be just as many 3-4 teams and then it will be harder to find players for the 3-4 (since there will be more demand for these type of players) while it will be easier to find players to the 4-3 (since there will be less demand for the players).

    ReplyDelete