Very few defenders for the Giants made it out of the locker room down in Tampa. Austin Johnson was one of them. He looked very active Monday Night and he is putting together a very nice season with 44 tackles, 6 TFL and 3 sacks. This is one guy the Giants should keep long-term as they undertake another roster make-over.
As for Dexter Lawrence, I've read on BBI that he is playing out of position and that he really should be used inside. How does that happen? Do the Giants move to a 4-3 and play him along side Austin Johnson? Or do they rotate the two in a 3-4 to keep them both fresh?
Maybe the general consensus is that Dexter Lawrence is the better player. I don't know? He seems to make highlight film plays and then disappears for a while. Would like to see both players side-by side for the next 4-5 years, but right now if one has to go, I'm keeping Austin Johnson.
Austin Johnson is underrated and should get more credit but he is not a star.
Based on his college production, Dex Lawrence is playing out of position.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
I never understood why a team would go to a 3-4 defense when they have no legit NFL linebackers. WE have one in Martinez who is hurt. Other than that the cupboard has been empty for at least a decade.
I never understood why a team would go to a 3-4 defense when they have no legit NFL linebackers. WE have one in Martinez who is hurt. Other than that the cupboard has been empty for at least a decade.
These guys set the tone for the entire defense, regardless of personnel grouping.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
I'd say we don't have the personnel to run a 4-3 well right now, though I did draw up a plan to do so a few weeks ago. We've been doing a 4-2 nickel defense quite a lot but the edges keep getting overrun in the run game or aren't winning their battles while rushing.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
We need edge guys either way, so I don't think a switch back to the 4-3 would be crazy.
To the OP, if we did play the 4-3, I would assume that we'd see LW inside at the 3T, not outside at DE, and then Lawrence and/or Johnson would fill the 0T/1T role. I think Elerson Smith could potentially fill out as a DE (but he's still untapped potential either way), but I don't know what the best utilization of Ojulari would be in a 4-3 alignment. Maybe he could still be impactful in the sort of role that Bruce Irvin played in Seattle?
That would be the biggest issue to switching back to the 4-3 IMO. I think we have some good parts on the DL, but we have loaded up on OLB edge guys. Most of them are basically replacement level thus far, so I wouldn't get hung up on making sure we have scheme that fits Carter or Ximines, for example, but I wouldn't want to turn Ojulari into a Clint Sintim replica.
Some excellent points!
As an aside, my assumption is there's no long term plans for either Lorenzo Carter or Oshane Ximines.
Love the player as a rotational piece, not as much when he is a starter playing a majority of snaps.
Hoping they can re-sign him to something in the neighborhood of 3 yrs, 10-12 mil
Quote:
...if "cleaning house" is part of the plan moving forward, a change to 4-3 should not be off of the table.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
We need edge guys either way, so I don't think a switch back to the 4-3 would be crazy.
To the OP, if we did play the 4-3, I would assume that we'd see LW inside at the 3T, not outside at DE, and then Lawrence and/or Johnson would fill the 0T/1T role. I think Elerson Smith could potentially fill out as a DE (but he's still untapped potential either way), but I don't know what the best utilization of Ojulari would be in a 4-3 alignment. Maybe he could still be impactful in the sort of role that Bruce Irvin played in Seattle?
That would be the biggest issue to switching back to the 4-3 IMO. I think we have some good parts on the DL, but we have loaded up on OLB edge guys. Most of them are basically replacement level thus far, so I wouldn't get hung up on making sure we have scheme that fits Carter or Ximines, for example, but I wouldn't want to turn Ojulari into a Clint Sintim replica.
Azeez actually plays quite a few snaps with his hand in the dirt as a DE. He’s perfectly capable, although his best spot is as a stand up rusher IMO. With the amount of hybrid fronts that are in today’s game, I wouldn’t worry as much about shoe horning a guy into a certain scheme. At the end of the day, his job is to beat the tackle.
Also, Ngakoue is the guy who I thought Ojulari was most comparable to coming out. Similar measurables and traits...Ngakoue has always been a 4-3 guy
Quote:
...if "cleaning house" is part of the plan moving forward, a change to 4-3 should not be off of the table.
Do we have the personnel to run it well right now?
If not, than the usual worries of mis-matched pers. for the scheme (which is multiple anyway) is not nearly as important an argument.
We need edge guys either way, so I don't think a switch back to the 4-3 would be crazy.
To the OP, if we did play the 4-3, I would assume that we'd see LW inside at the 3T, not outside at DE, and then Lawrence and/or Johnson would fill the 0T/1T role. I think Elerson Smith could potentially fill out as a DE (but he's still untapped potential either way), but I don't know what the best utilization of Ojulari would be in a 4-3 alignment. Maybe he could still be impactful in the sort of role that Bruce Irvin played in Seattle?
That would be the biggest issue to switching back to the 4-3 IMO. I think we have some good parts on the DL, but we have loaded up on OLB edge guys. Most of them are basically replacement level thus far, so I wouldn't get hung up on making sure we have scheme that fits Carter or Ximines, for example, but I wouldn't want to turn Ojulari into a Clint Sintim replica.
I actually had similar thoughts as you, right down to not knowing where Ojulari would fit into the 4-3.