Sirmon D

[Leroy Jenkins]

Looks like 3-4 with a hybrid DE/LB called the "viper". Coleman, Jung, Mullins were viper on day one.


"We'll play three down, four down, we'll be a multiple front, we're not a 3-4 team, we're not a 4-3 team. We're going to play defense at what we're good at and what we need to do to stop people."

I am Leroy's cautious optimism.

[Todd4State]

I just hope Dan stops making people try to run Manny's defense.

[CadaverDawg]

I just hope Dan stops making people try to run Manny's defense.

Wut?

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Collins & Manny D similarities were they both ran a 4-3. The comparisons stop there.

[CadaverDawg]

Collins & Manny D similarities were they both ran a 4-3. The comparisons stop there.

Yep

[GreenheadDawg]

I'll be expecting the same bend don't break defense from every other Mullen year. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt

[Ifyouonlyknew]

I'll be expecting the same bend don't break defense from every other Mullen year. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt

I don't think the defense last year was bend but don't break. We were aggressive we just didn't have the # of turnovers we would like.

[HoopsDawg]

Looks like 3-4 with a hybrid DE/LB called the "viper". Coleman, Jung, Mullins were viper on day one.


"We'll play three down, four down, we'll be a multiple front, we're not a 3-4 team, we're not a 4-3 team. We're going to play defense at what we're good at and what we need to do to stop people."

I am Leroy's cautious optimism.

Just hope it's not too complicated. MSU defense's are at their best when we keep it simple.

[msstate7]

Just hope it's not too complicated. MSU defense's are at their best when we keep it simple.

You saying we aren't very smart? Haha

[TrapGame]

Does any other college team run a hybrid 3-4/4-3 scheme?

IIRC, UGA did with Grantham and their viper position was call something like the bulldog.

[Johnson85]

Looks like 3-4 with a hybrid DE/LB called the "viper". Coleman, Jung, Mullins were viper on day one.


"We'll play three down, four down, we'll be a multiple front, we're not a 3-4 team, we're not a 4-3 team. We're going to play defense at what we're good at and what we need to do to stop people."

I am Leroy's cautious optimism.

Do not like. I guess I only remember the tough transitions, but it seems like moving from 4-3 to 3-4 in college often results in a painful transition year.

I can see that with Nick James and the LBs we have that this year we'd have pretty decent personnel for it, but can we recruit personnel for a 3-4 consistently?

[HoopsDawg]

You saying we aren't very smart? Haha

Not a lot of practice time these days to implement pro style schemes. And yes, a lot of our players come from very unsophisticated systems.

[Commercecomet24]

Collins & Manny D similarities were they both ran a 4-3. The comparisons stop there.

Absolutely correct!

[GTHOM]

I'll believe it when I see it. Mullen gonna Mullen. 3-4 is the way to go IMO

[CadaverDawg]

Do not like. I guess I only remember the tough transitions, but it seems like moving from 4-3 to 3-4 in college often results in a painful transition year.

I can see that with Nick James and the LBs we have that this year we'd have pretty decent personnel for it, but can we recruit personnel for a 3-4 consistently?

I see your point, and would agree with you if that was Sirmon's "set defense" moving forward....but he has mentioned multiple times that you must scheme according to what your defensive makeup (talent) allows, so I'm hopeful that he is doing this scheme for this team because we have a stout NG and a slough of high caliber LB'ers. I'm hoping that his flexibility and scheming according to personnel, will allow us to go after the best available defensive players and then adjust our scheme accordingly. Obviously I'm not talking Massive schematic changes, but determining whether we lean heavy 4-3 or 3-4 by where the talent and depth is THAT season on the defensive side. I'm all for it if that's the approach, and Sirmon has said that so we'll see. Either way, should fit our 2016 personnel very well imo.

[HoopsDawg]

I see your point, and would agree with you if that was Sirmon's "set defense" moving forward....but he has mentioned multiple times that you must scheme according to what your defensive makeup (talent) allows, so I'm hopeful that he is doing this scheme for this team because we have a stout NG and a slough of high caliber LB'ers. I'm hoping that his flexibility and scheming according to personnel, will allow us to go after the best available defensive players and then adjust our scheme accordingly. Obviously I'm not talking Massive schematic changes, but determining whether we lean heavy 4-3 or 3-4 by where the talent and depth is THAT season on the defensive side. I'm all for it if that's the approach, and Sirmon has said that so we'll see. Either way, should fit our 2016 personnel very well imo.

I'm not big on getting 3 or 4 true LB's on the field in today's game. I would lean more to a 4-2-5 than a 3-4. It has taken Saban several years to adapt his scheme to the spread offenses and tempo offenses and he is doing it with 5 stars across the board.