• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Kale Edwards in the Portal

Griz Addict said:
A team winning has nothing to do with the talent of 1 player. If he plays good against much stronger competition, that proves he can compete. Playing in the playoffs against Mercer isn't going to help your stock, at all. Don't know why this is hard for some to understand. You play weak competition, it's hard to tell how good a player is, you play against the best, you can tell.
Click to expand...
Not hard to understand at all, play on a winning team and rack up some decent stats get noticed...play against some decent completion in a highly competitive league get noticed... get the opportunity to put it on the line in a play or go home playoff get noticed ...work in variety of unconventional defensive sets and showcase your versatility get noticed ... Play for NMST, hope for the season to get over as quickly as possible and get noticed moving home...
 
alabamagrizzly said:
Just have 3rd google it for you.
Click to expand...
3rd knows the difference. 3rd Googled it to show how it is referred to as a form of the nickel defense, so that supporters of using it as a base defense will see what a ridiculous concept that is, and why no NC contender would ever employ it.
 
PTGrizzly said:
I don’t know what he wants to play, but a DE in a 3 front is very different than a DE in a 4 man front.

A DE in a 3 man front is essentially an interior defensive lineman in terms of role and line positioning. A DE in a 4 man front is usually considered an edge. They’re playing on the edge, get to do a lot more pass rushing on the outside of the line. A 4-3 DE and 3-4 OLB are basically the same position, except the former plays with his hand in the dirt, the latter doesn’t. A 3-3-5 doesn’t offer a lot positionally in terms of traditional pass rushing roles, and if Edwards wants to show he can do that only at the next level, it makes sense to play for a different defense.
Click to expand...
The insanity of Montana using 5 defensive backs instead of putting our best defensive group on the field should be obvious to anyone who understands which position groups are our strength here at Montana. We are a team which always has great LBs, and lots of depth at that position. The D-back position has not been our strength, especially in depth there. So, how does it make sense to keep a LB on the bench and substitute a DB when that is not a position of strength??? I'll wait for the geniuses to answer.
 
Da Boyz Mom said:
So just playing them is the most important part? Having no chance of winning doesn't come into play at all?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. These kids want a chance to be evaluated playing against top competition, in their quest to play in the NFL. NFL scouts don't focus on winning or losing when evaluating a player
 
ElrodGrizzly said:
My understanding is that he wanted good tape at the position he felt would get him drafted, as a traditional DE. We don't have that position, and this team would be his best option to put good tape out against quality opponents.

Most of the time, winning absolutely matters and I am totally with you. I understand why, in this case, he truly thinks his body is built for that NFL position and believes he can get drafted if he can get eyes on him.

I don't know him. That's just what I've heard from people who know more about it than I do.
Click to expand...
Which is virtually everyone.......
 
thirdandlong said:
The insanity of Montana using 5 defensive backs instead of putting our best defensive group on the field should be obvious to anyone who understands which position groups are our strength here at Montana. We are a team which always has great LBs, and lots of depth at that position. The D-back position has not been our strength, especially in depth there. So, how does it make sense to keep a LB on the bench and substitute a DB when that is not a position of strength??? I'll wait for the geniuses to answer.
Click to expand...
D-backs have been generally very good since Hauck returned. 2 first team all-conference corners this season. Very good safeties. Nice depth.

Can anyone make so many dumb and incorrect comments than this guy? He truly doesn’t know the game or what is happening with the Griz. It’s amusing to watch. He embarrasses himself in a majority of his posts.
 
AZDoc said:
Exactly what I was thinking…how many LBs in a 3-3-5? How many in a 4-3? I forget…
Click to expand...
I'm not against a 3-4 defense. Teams have won championships using the 3-4. I'm just 100% against the gimmicky 3-3-5. Let's emulate San Diego State. They are such a stellar power in FCS football. Every team should hang on everything they do down there.
 
thirdandlong said:
I'm not against a 3-4 defense. Teams have won championships using the 3-4. I'm just 100% against the gimmicky 3-3-5. Let's emulate San Diego State. They are such a stellar power in FCS football. Every team should hang on everything they do down there.
Click to expand...
Which teams won a championship at this level running a 3-4?
 
uofmman1122 said:
Which teams won a championship at this level running a 3-4?
Click to expand...
Glad to oblige:


The 3–4 defense was originally devised by Bud Wilkinson at the University of Oklahoma in the 1940s as the 5–2 Oklahoma defense. The first NFL team to regularly employ the 3–4 was the 1974 New England Patriots under Chuck Fairbanks, who employed the 5–2 for all but one of his six seasons (1967–72) as head coach of the Oklahoma Sooners (the 1971 Sooners employed the 4–3).

The 1972 Miami Dolphins were the first team to win a Super Bowl with the 3–4 defense, going undefeated and using number 53, Bob Matheson, as a down lineman or rushing linebacker. Matheson replaced defensive tackle Bob Heinz, shifting Manny Fernandez to nose guard.

In 1976, Oakland Raiders coach John Madden switched to the 3–4 after injuries decimated the team's defensive line. The Raiders went 13–1 in the regular season and defeated the Minnesota Vikings in Super Bowl XI.

The Dolphins shifted full-time to the 3–4 under Arnsparger in 1977, with Bob Baumhower anchoring the defense as a perennial All-Pro nose tackle.

The Pittsburgh Steelers have used the 3–4 as their base defense since 1982, the season after Hall of Fame defensive tackle Joe Greene and end L. C. Greenwood retired. In fact, the Steelers were the only NFL team to use the 3–4 defense during the 2001 season, but finished the season as the number one defense in the NFL.[2] It is believed that the Steelers' success with the 3–4 defense is the primary reason why many NFL teams have started returning to the formation.[3]

When the Raiders defeated the Philadelphia Eagles in Super Bowl XV, it marked the first Super Bowl in which both teams used the 3–4 as their base defense. Also notable several years later, the Big Blue Wrecking Crew, the defensive unit for the 1986 New York Giants who won Super Bowl XXI, was a 3–4 defense and featured all-time great Lawrence Taylor at right outside linebacker and fellow Hall of Famer Harry Carson on the inside. By the mid-1990s, only a few teams used a 3–4 defense, most notably the Buffalo Bills and Pittsburgh Steelers.[4]
 
thirdandlong said:
Glad to oblige:


The 3–4 defense was originally devised by Bud Wilkinson at the University of Oklahoma in the 1940s as the 5–2 Oklahoma defense. The first NFL team to regularly employ the 3–4 was the 1974 New England Patriots under Chuck Fairbanks, who employed the 5–2 for all but one of his six seasons (1967–72) as head coach of the Oklahoma Sooners (the 1971 Sooners employed the 4–3).

The 1972 Miami Dolphins were the first team to win a Super Bowl with the 3–4 defense, going undefeated and using number 53, Bob Matheson, as a down lineman or rushing linebacker. Matheson replaced defensive tackle Bob Heinz, shifting Manny Fernandez to nose guard.

In 1976, Oakland Raiders coach John Madden switched to the 3–4 after injuries decimated the team's defensive line. The Raiders went 13–1 in the regular season and defeated the Minnesota Vikings in Super Bowl XI.

The Dolphins shifted full-time to the 3–4 under Arnsparger in 1977, with Bob Baumhower anchoring the defense as a perennial All-Pro nose tackle.

The Pittsburgh Steelers have used the 3–4 as their base defense since 1982, the season after Hall of Fame defensive tackle Joe Greene and end L. C. Greenwood retired. In fact, the Steelers were the only NFL team to use the 3–4 defense during the 2001 season, but finished the season as the number one defense in the NFL.[2] It is believed that the Steelers' success with the 3–4 defense is the primary reason why many NFL teams have started returning to the formation.[3]

When the Raiders defeated the Philadelphia Eagles in Super Bowl XV, it marked the first Super Bowl in which both teams used the 3–4 as their base defense. Also notable several years later, the Big Blue Wrecking Crew, the defensive unit for the 1986 New York Giants who won Super Bowl XXI, was a 3–4 defense and featured all-time great Lawrence Taylor at right outside linebacker and fellow Hall of Famer Harry Carson on the inside. By the mid-1990s, only a few teams used a 3–4 defense, most notably the Buffalo Bills and Pittsburgh Steelers.[4]
Click to expand...
No, I mean which teams in the FCS won a title running the 3-4.
 
GrizTexas said:
Not hard to understand at all, play on a winning team and rack up some decent stats get noticed...play against some decent completion in a highly competitive league get noticed... get the opportunity to put it on the line in a play or go home playoff get noticed ...work in variety of unconventional defensive sets and showcase your versatility get noticed ... Play for NMST, hope for the season to get over as quickly as possible and get noticed moving home...
Click to expand...
😂 No. If you're a good D-lineman you'll get stats, no matter if you're on a losing team or not. FCS is a lot weaker competition. Just because you have good stats against weaker comp, doesn't make you good. You can play 100 games against weak competition and it's not going to help your stock. You play against good to great competition and rack up stats(even if your team sucks) you will have a much better chance at getting drafted. FCS is viewed as garbage to any FBS team. That's reality.
 
mthoopsfan said:
The Griz have many sets other than 3 down lineman. What position does off d-lineman play if LB is on line of scrimmage on other side? Not internal lineman.
Click to expand...
Usually they were shaded inside the OT, which isn’t considered a pass rushing position position.
 
thirdandlong said:
The insanity of Montana using 5 defensive backs instead of putting our best defensive group on the field should be obvious to anyone who understands which position groups are our strength here at Montana. We are a team which always has great LBs, and lots of depth at that position. The D-back position has not been our strength, especially in depth there. So, how does it make sense to keep a LB on the bench and substitute a DB when that is not a position of strength??? I'll wait for the geniuses to answer.
Click to expand...
It’s a 3-3-5 rather than a 4-3-4, 4-2-5, or 3-4-4. I think even you can figure out that the only one with more linebackers is a 3-4, and that would be a disaster at this level.

3-3-5 makes a lot of sense with spread offenses. Secondly, we’re talking base defense, and under Bradford, UM didn’t always play base defense like they did under Baer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top