Firstly, let me say it isn't going to happen. However, ideally, I would like to see NYG return to a 3-4. I don't think we have the players to implement Fewell's Tampa 2 well in the front seven.

There are a couple of issues, notably that Tuck isn't ideally suited to 3-4 DE and Boley is undersized at ILB.

There are two possible solutions firsly we could implement a 1 gap 5 technique DE system such as used by the cowboys or we could use Tuck in a similar way to guys like Bruce Smith, Leonard Marshall and Darnell Dockett have been used.

As for Boley, we try him out at the Mo LB.

and Finally, we don't have a true NT; but we can find that in the draft with someone like Phil Taylor.

At the moment, we need to upgrade two OLB spots and could upgrade MLB as well. However if we move to a 3-4 it takes on a whole new complextion.

This is how we currently shape up in a 4-3

LDE - Justin Tuck, Matthias Kiwanuka*/ Dave Tollefson

RDE - Osi Umenyiora, Jason Pierre-Paul

UT - Barry Cofield*, Linval Joseph

NT - Chris Canty, Rocky Bernard

SLB - Keith Bulluck, Clint Sintim, Chase Blackburn/ Adrian Tracy

MLB - Jon Goff, Gerris Wilkinson*

WLB - Michael Boley, Phillip Dillard

we need DT depth and upgrades at all three LB spots (including at least one definate starter)

Here is how we would shape up in a 3-4

LDE - Justin Tuck, Barry Cofield*

NT - Linval Joseph, Phil Taylor

RDE - Chris Canty, Ricky Bernard

LOLB - Osi Umenyiora, Clint Sintim/ Adrian Tracy

LILB - Jon Goff, Gerris Wilkinson*, Chase Blackburn

RILB - Keith Bulluck, Michael Boley, Phillip Dillard

ROLB - Jason Pierre-Paul, Matthias Kiwanuka/ Dave Tollefson




we would need NT depth and otherwise depth at LB and DE

I think the 3-4 would be much more effective

Let Fewell do his thing with the secondary, but the 3-4 is a much more agressive option.

We can also switch between 4-3 and 3-4 fronts if need be (much like Baltimore, New England etc)

To play a 3-4 base we would need a real anchor at nose tackle. That's putting too much stock in Linval Joseph, who was only active for about two games last season.

I'm not opposed to seeing a 3-4 in certain situations but just don't see it happening often with our current players.

Certain situations it might work. As a base not a chance. That defense would be way too slow. Tuck doesn't fit as an every down 5-tech De. We would be eliminating our best player. Osi and JPP wouldn't be on the field at the same time its way too slow, maybe Kiwi and Sintim. We would still need 2 inside backers. NT would also be a problem. Especially if we can't get Phil Taylor.

You also made a comment about the 3-4 being a much more aggressive option. That isn't true at all. A Jim Johnson/Steve Spags and Greg Williams style defense are just as aggressive if not more.

Our best fit is a 4-3. You've been wanting a 3-4 for years now Pete. You might want to start liking a 3-4 team or savor the 3 or 4 times we run it during the game. We aren't built for a 3-4 base.

Pizan wrote:
Our best fit is a 4-3. You've been wanting a 3-4 for years now Pete. You might want to start liking a 3-4 team or savor the 3 or 4 times we run it during the game. We aren't built for a 3-4 base.

Thats true and it probably comes back to two factors

firstly my memories of our defense in those Parcell days

secondly the ordinary LBs (particularly at OLB) we have had for some time.