Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I thought we got Robertson not to play in a 3-4?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CanDB
    replied
    Some things said here are absolutely right, and absolutely confusing to me. Yes it's true, Robertson is a 4-3 guy, and the whole deal with him coming here had to do with him not fitting in with the system in NY. So if you're going to spend some big money on a position that needed even bigger help in the offseason, then you better decide which route you are going with regarding your alignment. And if you're going 3-4 at some point, you should definitely make sure you have the players and the practice to see that it will be more effective come beginning of the season.

    I am a bit alarmed by all of this. I know that many of us are disappointed with Slowik, but in terms of the above discussion, unless someone is overriding him (hey, this isn't Oakland!), then he is doing worse than I thought. It seems unprepared and illogical. I just cringe when I see how creative some of the other D's are this year. And I won't use the B word too often, but get some imagination on blitzing for gosh sakes. It's almost too simple to point out any more. No pressure. Not even Dumervil.

    Enough on this, as it gets frustrating. It's not just lack of personnel. It's basically the idea of letting the opponents play at will.

    Leave a comment:


  • memo_azuara.DE
    replied
    Originally posted by lvbronx View Post
    We don't exactly have the players to play a 4-3 either.
    explain please

    Leave a comment:


  • xX-Bronco-Xx
    replied
    Originally posted by B4Bronco6 View Post
    I hope I never see that ugly 3-4 scheme again.

    The players are almost more confused then they were last year with Bates' epic scheme.
    Now that I look back we were so much better off with Bates then with Slowik.

    Leave a comment:


  • kratos_godofwar
    replied
    Anyone else wondering why we didn't experiement with this hybrid 3-4 in the preseason. It would have been better to experiement it there, where games didn't matter.

    Besides, we usually go to the sucktastic 3-4 only when Robertson isn't in, I think and hope. Also noticed that since Roberston didn't get activated in the KC game, KC ran all over us.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireShanahan
    replied
    Originally posted by Cutler=Elway View Post
    Why all of the sudden are we 3-4...This was done just over the course

    of the past few games...We cant get any pressure from a 3-4...

    Why did we invest in Robertson and take him outta a bad area

    for him to just see him fail again? lets rush 5 heck lets bring

    Blitzing on 50% of our plays why does a 3-4 Make sense...

    any answers?
    With the lack of production and the injury to Robertson, the failed physical and every other question mark, why did we sign this guy whether he was cheap and low risk or not. He is not living up to expections. 4-3 or 3-4, we don't have the line men to play either cause our line sucks. Plain and simple. We should have signed Corey williams or traded for Shaun Rogers or Haynesworth who are doing very good whether their teams are or not. We always sign trash D_linemen. We have also over paid for the most ridiculous guys that were busts too. To name a few; Daryl Garndener, Darius Holland, Sam Adams. I'm going to look into it and post more because I know there are way more than those ones. I'm just typing by what pops up in my head right now. Just a thought, TREVOR PRYCE shoulda been a Bronco for life, he's still productive on the #1 defense in the NFL! also, why was Mckinley cut over Ezebuen who hasn't returned productive after his injury, Engelberger who clearly isn't a starter in the league, Nic Clemons who do't see the field, Moss the "bust," and we sign a young nobody in Josh Shaw after Mckinley was our best lineman on the terrible team we had last year? Hmm.

    Leave a comment:


  • stargazer
    replied
    Originally posted by B4Bronco6 View Post
    I hope I never see that ugly 3-4 scheme again.

    The players are almost more confused then they were last year with Bates' epic scheme.
    The question though? Why are we seeing it? I just don't get it.

    Leave a comment:


  • lvbronx
    replied
    Originally posted by Broncos Nation View Post
    I sure hope the 3-4 experiment is over and done with. We don't have a single player suited for the 3-4. Not our ends, not our linebackers. If we have a 4th LB that we feel good about, great, depth is always good. He can rotate in once in a while and be a dominant special teams player (ha.ha.).
    We don't exactly have the players to play a 4-3 either.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peerless
    replied
    I hope I never see that ugly 3-4 scheme again.

    The players are almost more confused then they were last year with Bates' epic scheme.

    Leave a comment:


  • jhildebrand
    replied
    Originally posted by Broncos Nation View Post
    I sure hope the 3-4 experiment is over and done with. We don't have a single player suited for the 3-4. Not our ends, not our linebackers. If we have a 4th LB that we feel good about, great, depth is always good. He can rotate in once in a while and be a dominant special teams player (ha.ha.).
    I doubt we see it again. KC offensively is at the bottom of the league as far as points, rushing, and overall numbers. They shredded that in an instant.

    When everybody is much better offensively, what do you think will happen?

    Leave a comment:


  • Broncos Nation
    replied
    Originally posted by jhildebrand View Post
    That would be correct.

    Also, notice how we lined up in the 3-4 right off the bat in KC. LJ went for 65 and you didn't see that alignment for the rest of the game

    Denver 3-4=experiment gone horribly wrong.
    I sure hope the 3-4 experiment is over and done with. We don't have a single player suited for the 3-4. Not our ends, not our linebackers. If we have a 4th LB that we feel good about, great, depth is always good. He can rotate in once in a while and be a dominant special teams player (ha.ha.).

    Leave a comment:


  • RCardoza278430
    replied
    I am all for the Broncos playing the best 11 defensive players aqt the same time. I understood from Shannahans press conference last week that they might have believed they had their best 11 on the field when Winborn joined DJ, Nate, and Boss. Clearly on LJ's first long run it was Winborn that over-pursued and missed the tackle in the whole. And LJ is a big person to completely whiff on.

    Anyway, if they are going to try some variation of the 3-4 scheme, they need to at least bring two of the four linebackers on the blitz. Otherwise, that defense will not work.

    Obviously we have the personnel for a 4-3, but throwing a wrinkle of 3-4 is not a bad idea so long as they bring two of the four linebackers on the blitz.

    Leave a comment:


  • jhildebrand
    replied
    Originally posted by Northern Lights View Post
    You got that backwards. He was good when the Jets had a 4-3 defense. Mangini comes along and implements a 3-4 and his production declined because he wasn't suited for the 3-4. Same thing happened with Jonathan Vilma
    That would be correct.

    Also, notice how we lined up in the 3-4 right off the bat in KC. LJ went for 65 and you didn't see that alignment for the rest of the game

    Denver 3-4=experiment gone horribly wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Northern Lights
    replied
    Originally posted by Bronco-24 View Post
    I thought that when we got him, he was supposed to be in a natural position at a 3-4 instead of the Jets' 4-3, but I could be wrong.
    You got that backwards. He was good when the Jets had a 4-3 defense. Mangini comes along and implements a 3-4 and his production declined because he wasn't suited for the 3-4. Same thing happened with Jonathan Vilma

    Leave a comment:


  • Bronco-24
    replied
    Originally posted by Cutler=Elway View Post
    Why all of the sudden are we 3-4...This was done just over the course

    of the past few games...We cant get any pressure from a 3-4...

    Why did we invest in Robertson and take him outta a bad area

    for him to just see him fail again? lets rush 5 heck lets bring

    Blitzing on 50% of our plays why does a 3-4 Make sense...

    any answers?
    I thought that when we got him, he was supposed to be in a natural position at a 3-4 instead of the Jets' 4-3, but I could be wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • I thought we got Robertson not to play in a 3-4?

    Why all of the sudden are we 3-4...This was done just over the course

    of the past few games...We cant get any pressure from a 3-4...

    Why did we invest in Robertson and take him outta a bad area

    for him to just see him fail again? lets rush 5 heck lets bring

    Blitzing on 50% of our plays why does a 3-4 Make sense...

    any answers?
Working...
X