Is this a year to consider moving to a 3-4 defense,

However, the answer is no

Hankins is not a 3-4 NT, that would be a waste of his talents.

Now if JPP is gone (big if in my book) and the Giants sign BJ Raji who can play NT and DE in a 3-4, then sign OLB Justin Houston away from KC, provided he hits the market, then yes. But I doubt either of those things happen, even if JPP is gone.

The 3-4 speculation is always fun, and makes me nostalgic for the LT, Reasons, Carson, Banks, and Pepper days

He's a 4-3 guy as we know. A decision like that has to be made before the hiring process.

And they have no LBs.

Not sure why we would move to a 3-4 if Spags has never run one before.

Spags deploys a 4-3, we'd be woefully short on talent in the front seven that is best utilized in a 3-4, and our best players in the front seven are best suited to their 4-3 roles. There's a great deal of energy and capital spent by teams in scouting, projecting, drafting, and developing the players for their schemes.

Eli is 34, they're trying to reload as quickly as possible, even though they might still be one year away from contender.

but as dorgan has pointed out in the past, when you reach this level, you should be able to coach any scheme..

In comment 12133902 Victor in CT said:

Quote:

He's a 4-3 guy as we know. A decision like that has to be made before the hiring process. And they have no LBs.

Victor, I've asked myself the same question. But my sense is that our personnel could for the first time in years be a better fit for the 3-4 if we worked to make it so through FA and this particular draft, with the amount of rushing OLBs available in this draft.

the same possibility last week with the same reasons and got skewered.

thus, the return of Spags as a big example. There's more risk, growing pains, and personnel required involved switching schemes now, I'd wager TC is going to keep it simple and utilize known entities, this is a one year sprint for him and much of the staff.

wouldn't be as big as the O changes were last year. So, no.

And here are the reasons why...

1) Hankings MIGHT be able to play NT.. however he is a better 1 technique... so playing him at that position is not optimal..

2) Bromley is a 3 technique. Not a five technique..

3) Jenkins can play in a 3-4 because he has in the past.. However now you havent accounted for DEPTH at the DE position either.. so now you have to go out and get DE's as a back up to rotate as 5 techniques AND you have to get another nose tackle..

4) Linebackers.. Giants can BARELY field three decent ones.. Now you need back up linebackers as well... so now you need to draft back up LB's or sign more LB's in FA..

5) You have a coach whose strength is the 4-3.. however he has picked up some 3-4 ideas from the Ravens.. but his STRENGTH is the 4-3.. if they wanted to run a 4-3 they wouldnt have hired him..

6) The Giants are NOT changing their defensive philosophy. Something Coughlin was specific about...

So basically.. no..

Kennard might be the only foundation player/keeper who might be of the ability to excel, not just exist in a 3-4. McClain is very ordinary, Beason would be a major schematic shift, etc.

4-3 DE are getting harder to find too. However, hiring Spags probably closed to door on a switch to a 3-4.

In comment 12133904 arcarsenal said:

Quote:

Not sure why we would move to a 3-4 if Spags has never run one before.

Ha, the only question I could think of in response to this thread was going to be "Has Spags ever ran a 3-4 before?"

With the answer being no apparently, I don't even know why this is worth discussing (and that's not a knock on the OP who generally has interesting topics, IMO).

a better scheme for that than the 4-3, I think the reason the Giants allow so much rushing yardage is the lack of quality personnel rather than the 4-3 scheme. If we get better/healthier starters and better depth on the front seven we will stop the run regardless of the scheme.

It's not out of the realm of possibilities that he could run one, I mean.. Baltimore runs one. But as the secondary coach there, his guys assignments wouldn't change a whole lot between the two alignments so that's not saying much.

I just don't see any chance of us making that kind of change in a year where Coughlin needs to post a winning record. Not when the DC hasn't run one before and the personnel overhaul would be more than a 1 year project.

but it is a fair question going forward.

As we know, the 3-4 requires a special level of talent at the LB position compared to the 4-3. How about asking the question from a "future draft" perspective? Is it easier to find 3-4 DL and 3-4 LBs in the draft (based on the systems and personnel in college) versus the 4-3 DL and 4-3 LBs?

Are there more Clint Sintim type of "tweener" DE/OLB types that would better fit as 3-4 OLBs than 4-3 DEs?

What about the DL? Is it easier to find a 3-4 NT and a 3-4 five technique DE?

If one were to create a new defense from the 2015 draft, would it be easier to fill it will a talented from 7 as a 3-4 or a 4-3?

began the day after the last game. You don't hire Spags if you have even the slightest inkling to move to a 3-4.

And they really don't have that centerpiece NT in the middle who can consume blockers and open up opportunities for the LBs to make plays in the box. I'd argue that the NT spot is the single most important player in a 3-4 D. They don't have that guy on the roster right now.

Plus i don't see their LB corps - maybe outside of Kennard - being capable of playing any of the LB spots in an above average capacity. You think TC will take the chance of moving Moore or Ayers back to the OLB or hybrid role? No way.

It's fun to talk about and debate i suppose but from coaching AND personnel standpoints it doesn't make much sense.

as soon as the new coach is on board.

but not going to happen.
1. TC is a 4-3 guy
2. Spags is a 4-3 guy
3. We currently don't have the personal to make it work

In comment 12134086 Beer Man said:

Quote:

but not going to happen. 1. TC is a 4-3 guy 2. Spags is a 4-3 guy 3. We currently don't have the personal to make it work

The only way a 3-4 could work with our current staff would be our doing the following: 1. UFA NT signed, 2. Rookie #1 DT Shelton picked, 3. UFA NT signed (veteran who can still play some snaps but not the whole game), 3. move Hankins to DE and JPP to DE. Bromely becomes a total backup DE maybe. 5. Beason returns to form, McClain plays inside well, Kennard delivers and Moore becomes a pass rush LB. We sign a UFA LB.

That is a WHOLE LOT to expect. No way we go 3-4.

The only time it might happen is when the whole current coaching staff leaves and we start fresh with a new HC. If he or his DC wants a 3-4 and we have the personnel that could work for it, then we might see it.

A lot of our guys just don't fit.

-Damontre Moore, Robert Ayers, Kerry Wynn aren't good fits. They are much better in a 4-3 end role. JPP is probably even better in a 4-3, but I feel like he would be able to play both.

So we would devalue a few players and need a ton of help at rush LB.

-Kennard could play in the 3-4 and the 4-3 as an OLB. I don't think he is better in a 3-4 than a 4-3, so not much to gain out of him.

Beason would be playing in a completely new system. As a leader and someone who lines us up, that kills his value.

McClain is worse in a 3-4 than a 4-3. He was decent here, but very average to slightly below average for the Ravens.

Williams/Paysinger is also a terrible fit for a 3-4.

Herzlich is possibly a better fit in a 3-4, but he isn't someone you change your system for.

-We don't have a nose. No Hankins isn't one. He wasn't for Ohio State because he is much more valuable as a 5 or a 3 tech. He can play there on passing downs, but he'd be wasted as a 1 or 0 tech. Dominique Hamilton is probably our only nose.

-Other guys are basically a wash in a 4-3 or 3-4. They'd still be mostly playing the same tech as they are now. Bromley would stay as a 3 tech. Kuhn/Jenkins would be 3/5 techs. But no major win there.

-Coaching staff is much more experienced with a 4-3.

So all in all, I don't see this year being a great opportunity for a switch. I would think that next year, if things go badly, would be a great year to completely rebuild. About 60 million on the cap right now for next year with a lot of guys easy to cut. Also we would have Ayers gone and Moore final year of his contract (if he hasn't shown any more improvement) and would make it easier to make the move.

Very interesting and intelligent comments.

In comment 12133902 Victor in CT said:

Quote:

He's a 4-3 guy as we know. A decision like that has to be made before the hiring process. And they have no LBs.

OLB's that have experience in the 3-4 are all over the place now. More than ever, teams are doing that defense. That's why it's hard to think of great 4-3 OLB's in this current time. Think of the Giants DE's are the 3-4 OLBs. JPP is a tricky one since he is more prone to be a run stopper than most ends. But I think the problem still exists on the 4-3 side. We don't know a lot about the reliability of Wynn and Moore. They need to improve if they're being counted on in the 2015 season. Ayers may have to start. He played extremely well, but he's been an average DE in his career.

DT's are another issue with one being a legit player. I love Hankins, but Bromley is a complete unknown and Kuhn and Patterson are just JAGs right now. Jenkins I see getting cut.

So they have a lot of work to do finding another DE, another STARTING DT and beef up the depth, and as well as find a starting OLB opposite Kennard.

While we don't have every piece, a few of our players translate to the 3-4, McClain and Beason could be ILB without much issue, Kennard and Moore both played in the 3-4 in college, Jenkins played in the 3-4 as a DE. I think Bromley could handle the DE position and Hankins is 320 lbs, how could he not be a good NT?

The 4-3 DE and MLB are harder to find and now we have to she'll out a boat load of money to keep JPP, who some feel might be a risky signing with his health issues. The 3-4 seems better suited to defense the read option.

That said, I think we are sticking with the 4-3 and will over pay JPP.

Before you get to the LB, who are the Giants 290LB DE that you need for a 3-4. They have none on the roster.

They have more adequate bodies at LB than DL

Most importantly they have coaches who know 4-3

no

will often show 3-4 to confuse the offense. It confuses me too when that happens so I assume...