Re: Recent Switches to 3-4 Defense Usually Mean Improvement
I agree. I'm tired of this argument. I think once you make the decision to go 3-4, just do it. Rip the freaking "bandaid off" and let the message boards cry about the consequences during the offseason.
Here's why:
1) EXPERIENCE: By the time we would have had "the pieces" in 2-3 years, everyone will have already learned the 3-4. Other teams like Green Bay made switches easier, but I value the experience our guys had this year. We also immediately saw who fits in this system and who doesn't. We weren't going to the SuperBowl this year, so I'm okay we were dead last in defense -- because we got the top 10 pick while we got the 3-4 experience.
2) HAYNESWORTH: The biggest need was having an NT, and when they made the decision to go with the 3-4, they thought that eventually AH would convert over. They were wrong, and this is one of the key reasons the transition didn't work well.
3) REBUILDING: Hard to watch, but after 2 decades of mediocrity - this is the process of rebuilding. Whenever you make the switch your defense is going to suffer. If we were playoff contenders, then making this switch immediately would have been dumb. But since we are rebuilding (and denying it so we can sell tickets) - it makes sense to change everything quickly and accept a mess for a couple of years.
I'll accept that there's an argument about whether we needed to switch to the 3-4 at all, but once you make that decision, I think it makes sense to switch immediately and darn the consequences.
|