4-3 V.s. 3-4

[wayne]

There is a reason most teams are switching to the 3-4 and the 4-3 is becoming a thing of the past. Confusion is your best defense and the 3-4 brings the possibility of more confusion to the table. There are few teams that can be like the Colts are and the Giants of yesteryear . Players like Oher and Claudy are making it harder and harder for the old, traditional win your one-on-onef battle type of strategy . Sure, who don't drool over the thought of only rushing 4 players getting pressure on the Qb in less than 2-3 secs but the reality of having that type of personnel to run that type of scheme ( you basically need 2 dominant pass rushers like Strahan/Tuck and Osi or Mathis and Freeny or Ogonyelwe and Brown of the Bears ) is alot harder to come by than it seems and for further proof of that, how many teams in this past decade can say they had the type of personnel to run that scheme and run it as great as the teams I mentioned earlier in this post? I wish we could just have the 3-4 as our base D and throw in the 4-3 from time to time depending on which team and Qb we go against . Your Mlb is one of the key ingredients for the 4-3 to work and IDK if Ray still has the range to play that position anymore b/c the 3-4 sort of cut the field in half making up for Ray losing a step with the other Mlb right by his side. Also, I don't think JJ has the speed or agility to handle the OLB position in the 4-3, he would be better bulking back up a little playing DE but as much as I love JJ, I really feel we need an upgrade at his position .

Also, I don't think Mattison knows how to really work the 3-4 anyway so the 4-3 might be our best bet now that I think about it.

[Ravensfan23]

Another thing about Mattison is, he's bringing the basic principles of defense back to the Ravens.

Mattison now has the Ravens focused on winning more 1 on 1 battles. That is what defense is supposed to be about, regradless if it's a 3-4 or 4-3.

Too many times in the past we've seen the Ravens defense try to win by confusing the offense, but when it doesn't work we just look stuck.

The dline has been taught to just be run stuffers, space eaters, and occupy blockers for LBs to try and run free. However on passing downs when that doesn't work, it seems like we just stand at the line and play pitty pat with the oline. Or it looks like we have a defensive line full of guys trying to mirror the QB.

Getting this defense back to having the mindset of winning 1 on 1 battles, will be great and it'll improve both run and pass defense imo.

[Ravens Lover]

I also think we should use both

[Bltravens]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='26 March 2010 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1269665805' post='383281']
Ding ding ding ding ding.. nailed it. Ravens have spent years drafting personnel to fit Rex's unique 46 defense and a dominate top tier 3/4 defense. It's lunacy to attempt a switch back to a now ancient 4/3 defense especially given the idea of winning now instead of hoping for later.
[/quote]
Mattison cant run Rex's defense tho, he can take certain plays from it that he likes, but he'll never be able to run it the way Rex does. Rex designed his scheme and system from scratch, he knows all the intricacies, what to call in situations and what not to call, no other DC will be able to know Rex's defense like Rex does. The reason you got all these teams switching to a 3-4 is because you have all these college DEs that are really good pass rushers, but theyre undersized at the NFL level. Guys who are 240-250 that would get swallowed by NFL caliber Ts if they had their hand in the dirt all game. Mattison's defense is fine and beyond effective, and actually if I recall in 2007 when Rex's defense lost 2 starting corners the whole scheme fell apart, because he refused to give them help. Mattison's got stronger as the year progressed after the ACLs.

[EdReedFTW]

[quote name='Shammy' date='26 March 2010 - 03:59 PM' timestamp='1269633558' post='383032']
on top of that haynesworth did what last year in a 4-3 ... da guys overrated ...
[/quote]

Haynesworth has always been in a 43, this is his first year of a 34. Last year he just sucked.

[Shammy]

if they do switch to a base 43 they should put price in da middle with ngata instead of DE

[wayne]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' date='27 March 2010 - 06:15 AM' timestamp='1269692135' post='383335']
Another thing about Mattison is, he's bringing the basic principles of defense back to the Ravens.

Mattison now has the Ravens focused on winning more 1 on 1 battles. That is what defense is supposed to be about, regradless if it's a 3-4 or 4-3.

Too many times in the past we've seen the Ravens defense try to win by confusing the offense, but when it doesn't work we just look stuck.

The dline has been taught to just be run stuffers, space eaters, and occupy blockers for LBs to try and run free. However on passing downs when that doesn't work, it seems like we just stand at the line and play pitty pat with the oline. Or it looks like we have a defensive line full of guys trying to mirror the QB.

Getting this defense back to having the mindset of winning 1 on 1 battles, will be great and it'll improve both run and pass defense imo.
[/quote]

Again, I understand what Mattison is trying to do but that is not as easy as it seems it could be and thats why majority of teams are switching to the 3-4 b/c its hard for D- Lineman to consistently win 1- on - 1 battles against O-lineman these days . Of this decade, you have the Colts, Bears, Giants, and Viks that have somewhat made that style of play work and I would only mentioned the Colts and Giants simply b/c they won SB's. I would love for us to get back to the basics and play football like its suppose to be played with winning your individual battles ( rushing your front 4 with less blitzing )but I honestly feel the league is getting too advanced for that style of play ( exception to that if you can get two elite pass rushers on your team )

[XxSizzleXx]

If there are questions as to whether we will be switching to a 4-3 I just don't see it happening, it was very apparent at the start of the season where we ran it majority of the time we struggled on defense. I can see guys like McKinney sharing time with Gregg, Redding will be sharing time with Pryce while Kruger would be in on certain situations on the line back in our 3-4.

Like pointed out above you can create a lot more confusion when you run a 3-4 as to who you are rushing with, there is also more speed on the field which is another reason why I think we should and will stick with it.

If we were to switch to a 4-3 we would most likely have Suggs and Johnson/Kruger on the edges, but in doing that I believe you take out a lot of the the versatility that these players have, which is exactly why we run the 3-4. We use our players in many different ways and in the 4-3 we just can't do that. For a really good 4-3 defense you need those two plugs in the middle, and those 2 edge rushers on the outside.

[Fred Sanford]

I'd like to see us get Ted Washington, Tony Siragusa, and Gilbert Brown out of retirement, give them each a wheelbarrow of Natty Bo and Ho-Ho's, and have them bulk up to 650 lbs. or so. Have them each just keel over into the O-line as the ball is snapped. The TE, FB, RB, and entire o-line would be enveloped by their massive jiggling guts. Perhaps not a sound pass rush but it would sure work in obvious run downs.

------------

Mattison uses the standard 4 man D-line a lot more than Rex, and usually does an OLB blitz 4 man rush even out of the 3-4. The thing he's always stressing is that he wants our guys to win 1-on-1 battles rather than blitzing much. That's fine if you have the personnel, but that includes secondary as well as D-line. Teams went into max protect and beat us with it last year because they knew just 2 guys running routes could beat our DB's with time. Our D-line is mostly built for run stopping, too, but the Redding signing and emphasis with Haloti etc. on the pass rush this offseason should help.

Whatever we run, the key is getting more inside push. Our outside blitzes got swallowed up in the wash last year, and too often QB's could step up in the pocket comfortably. Whatever we did to confuse the Pats and failed to do against the Colts in the playoffs, that's what we need to keep doing.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='Fred Sanford' date='28 March 2010 - 03:50 AM' timestamp='1269769804' post='383538']
I'd like to see us get Ted Washington, Tony Siragusa, and Gilbert Brown out of retirement, give them each a wheelbarrow of Natty Bo and Ho-Ho's, and have them bulk up to 650 lbs. or so. Have them each just keel over into the O-line as the ball is snapped. The TE, FB, RB, and entire o-line would be enveloped by their massive jiggling guts. Perhaps not a sound pass rush but it would sure work in obvious run downs.

------------

Mattison uses the standard 4 man D-line a lot more than Rex, and usually does an OLB blitz 4 man rush even out of the 3-4. The thing he's always stressing is that he wants our guys to win 1-on-1 battles rather than blitzing much. That's fine if you have the personnel, but that includes secondary as well as D-line. Teams went into max protect and beat us with it last year because they knew just 2 guys running routes could beat our DB's with time. Our D-line is mostly built for run stopping, too, but the Redding signing and emphasis with Haloti etc. on the pass rush this offseason should help.

Whatever we run, the key is getting more inside push. Our outside blitzes got swallowed up in the wash last year, and too often QB's could step up in the pocket comfortably. Whatever we did to confuse the Pats and failed to do against the Colts in the playoffs, that's what we need to keep doing.
[/quote]
Thats part of the goal though, if we can get Redding or Ngata or possibly a newly drafted kid to improve the pocket collapsing then we're fine in the pass rush department. Suggs actually got alot of outside pressure this year even being as big and slow as he was, the QB just had too much space to step up on him. What we did in the Pats game was basically NO gameplan against the Pats, combined with alot of A gap blow ups to make Brady move laterally in the pocket as opposed to north and south. We dropped 8 guys in coverage on alot of 3rd downs. I dont know how often we can deploy that style of gameplan.

[DocMartin]

Just a thought about Cory Redding.
I think he will play as starting DE, and you know what that means? We are on the way to be playing 4-3 scheme!?
1) If he plays DT, he would be behind Ngata and Gregg on the depth chart, therefore on the bench as 3rd string
2) Ravens wouldn't pay 2mil/year to guy to sit on bench
3) If he plays DE, would be starting opposite of DE Pryce, with Ngata & Gregg in the middle = 4-3 defense
4) Or he plays DE and Pryce sits, which is highly unlikely, and we still play 3-4
So, all in all, I see a major move in the Defensive Scheme, moving between 3-4 and 4-3, just wondering what's D-Coordinator Mattison up to?

[Shammy]

[quote name='DocMartin' date='28 March 2010 - 08:59 PM' timestamp='1269824374' post='383702']
Just a thought about Cory Redding.
I think he will play as starting DE, and you know what that means? We are on the way to be playing 4-3 scheme!?
1) If he plays DT, he would be behind Ngata and Gregg on the depth chart, therefore on the bench as 3rd string
2) Ravens wouldn't pay 2mil/year to guy to sit on bench
3) If he plays DE, would be starting opposite of DE Pryce, with Ngata & Gregg in the middle = 4-3 defense
4) Or he plays DE and Pryce sits, which is highly unlikely, and we still play 3-4
So, all in all, I see a major move in the Defensive Scheme, moving between 3-4 and 4-3, just wondering what's D-Coordinator Mattison up to?

[/quote]


probably will rotate wherever like bannan ... bannan rotated DE AND DT ...

[Ed_Reed20]

I would say Redding is a better player than Edwards and Dwan was able to force Pryce into a situational pass rushing role last season.

If Redding plays like he's got something to prove(which he does) he could really add someting to the defense.

[indianstick]

I agree with Edreed20..redding is going to be used like edwards was, so he is probably going to rotate with pryce

[indianstick]

I really think we are going to stay with the 3-4 like we had last year..it may look like a 4-3 at times (esp bc ngatla is a true DT playing DE)..but like a lot of people said it could also seem like a 4-3 when one of the olbs (usually suggs) has his hands down..which is usually in obvious passing situations butive seen him drop back in coverage a lot of times though and JJ will blitz from the other side

We definitely have the personnel for a 3-4 and we also brought in suggs' dline coach from college as our olb coach (monachino)..i think he is going to help improve the pressure off the edges and in a 4-3..you don't really get too much pressure in the pass rush from your olbs

Our lbs perfect for a 3-4..and suggs is a hybrid de/olb..redding is said to replace edwards role which means he will play DE and he will be more than capable of doing a good job

I think we will draft accordingly to continue using 3-4 as our base

[shaikh015]

I like it when the olb's drop back in pass coverage... The Defensive tackles need to allow them to do so.

[cant knock the hustle]

We will stay in the 3-4 mostly with Redding starting at DE and Pryce playing in obvious passing situations. However, Redding is also a gifted DT and I could envision him lining up with Ngata on the inside and while Pryce plays LDE and Suggs comes up and puts his hand down at RDE in the 4-3. This would also allow Kruger to enter the mix. As it was stated earlier, Redding is coming in as an uprgrade over Edwards to play a similar, yet expanded, role.

[Kevin Mullins]

The 4-3 and 3-4 obviously present strengths, and in leagues-past a team was either one or the other. However, with the burst of NFL passing games, and the limited "play" a corner has with his receiver, defenses are being forced to essentially create new formations in an effort to disrupt pass protection, and hopefully have an unblocked man.

The current Ravens team is without a doubt this new hybrid defense.

I would argue that the Ravens schemes are 4-6-1, 2-5-4, 3-5-3, and even at times 1-5-5 and NOT the conventional 3-4/4-3 alignments.

The Ravens are prided on their versatility, and having players such as Suggs, Johnson, and Ngata are crucial to a variable defense.

In the 2-5-4 alignment. Ngata and Gregg would be your consistent down line-man while Suggs (WLB) Ray (MLB) Mclain (MLB) Elerbe (TLB) and Johnson (SLB) all consistently shift and adjust formation pre-snap in the 5-7 yard box. Obviously Reed, Landry, Fox, and w/e healthy corner starts make up the Defensive backfield.

The Ravens could greatly improve their team by drafting a stud defense end that could play the stand up role in such a abstract formation, as well as bring the heat with his knuckles white. Maybe just maybe Paul Kruger can put on quality lean muscle and be the heir to Pryce, which then pushes the need inside to replace the ever aging Gregg.

The Ravens...if forced to be conventional would be 3-4 beyond a shadow of a doubt due to our lack of TWO dominant inside lineman.




Sorry to run on and say a thousand things, but the in's and outs of football are my speciality.

[Shammy]

[quote name='Kevin Mullins' date='29 March 2010 - 05:40 PM' timestamp='1269898837' post='384011']
The 4-3 and 3-4 obviously present strengths, and in leagues-past a team was either one or the other. However, with the burst of NFL passing games, and the limited "play" a corner has with his receiver, defenses are being forced to essentially create new formations in an effort to disrupt pass protection, and hopefully have an unblocked man.

The current Ravens team is without a doubt this new hybrid defense.

I would argue that the Ravens schemes are 4-6-1, 2-5-4, 3-5-3, and even at times 1-5-5 and NOT the conventional 3-4/4-3 alignments.

The Ravens are prided on their versatility, and having players such as Suggs, Johnson, and Ngata are crucial to a variable defense.

In the 2-5-4 alignment. Ngata and Gregg would be your consistent down line-man while Suggs (WLB) Ray (MLB) Mclain (MLB) Elerbe (TLB) and Johnson (SLB) all consistently shift and adjust formation pre-snap in the 5-7 yard box. Obviously Reed, Landry, Fox, and w/e healthy corner starts make up the Defensive backfield.

The Ravens could greatly improve their team by drafting a stud defense end that could play the stand up role in such a abstract formation, as well as bring the heat with his knuckles white. Maybe just maybe Paul Kruger can put on quality lean muscle and be the heir to Pryce, which then pushes the need inside to replace the ever aging Gregg.

The Ravens...if forced to be conventional would be 3-4 beyond a shadow of a doubt due to our lack of TWO dominant inside lineman.




Sorry to run on and say a thousand things, but the in's and outs of football are my speciality.
[/quote]


I was gonna post somethin similar lol

[DocMartin]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='26 March 2010 - 12:30 PM' timestamp='1269621059' post='382896']
I think the team would be more comfortable playing Pryce or Redding before Kruger right now.

Kruger has a lot to learn and likely won't become a quality DE after just one off-season filling out his frame and working on his repertoire.
[/quote]
Agreed. If we do this 4-3, it would probably look like this: DE Redding DT Ngata DT Gregg DE Pryce
OLB Johnson MLB Lewis OLB Suggs
But I still think we will be more into 3-4, because we just have so many good LB's, and keep in mind it's a long season and injuries happen.

[Kevin Mullins]

[quote name='DocMartin' date='29 March 2010 - 11:23 PM' timestamp='1269919386' post='384155']
Agreed. If we do this 4-3, it would probably look like this: DE Redding DT Ngata DT Gregg DE Pryce
OLB Johnson MLB Lewis OLB Suggs
But I still think we will be more into 3-4, because we just have so many good LB's, and keep in mind it's a long season and injuries happen.

[/quote]

Don't rule an in-house guy like Divens or McKinney out either. Personally I believe Ngata should be an end at all costs because of his mobility. He gets wasted if he gets trapped inside with a guard/center DT'ing him all the time. But he can beat any tackle or out-stepping guard at any time.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='wayne' date='27 March 2010 - 08:05 AM' timestamp='1269691515' post='383334']
There is a reason most teams are switching to the 3-4 and the 4-3 is becoming a thing of the past. Confusion is your best defense and the 3-4 brings the possibility of more confusion to the table. There are few teams that can be like the Colts are and the Giants of yesteryear . Players like Oher and Claudy are making it harder and harder for the old, traditional win your one-on-onef battle type of strategy . Sure, who don't drool over the thought of only rushing 4 players getting pressure on the Qb in less than 2-3 secs but the reality of having that type of personnel to run that type of scheme ( you basically need 2 dominant pass rushers like Strahan/Tuck and Osi or Mathis and Freeny or Ogonyelwe and Brown of the Bears ) is alot harder to come by than it seems and for further proof of that, how many teams in this past decade can say they had the type of personnel to run that scheme and run it as great as the teams I mentioned earlier in this post? I wish we could just have the 3-4 as our base D and throw in the 4-3 from time to time depending on which team and Qb we go against . Your Mlb is one of the key ingredients for the 4-3 to work and IDK if Ray still has the range to play that position anymore b/c the 3-4 sort of cut the field in half making up for Ray losing a step with the other Mlb right by his side. Also, I don't think JJ has the speed or agility to handle the OLB position in the 4-3, he would be better bulking back up a little playing DE but as much as I love JJ, I really feel we need an upgrade at his position .

Also, I don't think Mattison knows how to really work the 3-4 anyway so the 4-3 might be our best bet now that I think about it.
[/quote]
This whole discussion goes to my fundamental beef with having Gregg Mattison as DC of the Ravens' defense. Everyone and anyone inside or outside the game of football realizes the Ravens have been the very best 3/4 or 46 defense over the last few years. Why in the world would Mattison suddenly decide to run schemes from a base 4/3 alignment with little blitzing? And why did it take nearly half the season of no pressure on opposing QB's and hanging the secondary out to dry to realize the base 4/3 idea was a huge miscalculation? That kind of wrongheaded thinking does not speak well for future prospects of this proud Ravens' defense.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Kevin Mullins' date='29 March 2010 - 05:40 PM' timestamp='1269898837' post='384011']
The 4-3 and 3-4 obviously present strengths, and in leagues-past a team was either one or the other. However, with the burst of NFL passing games, and the limited "play" a corner has with his receiver, defenses are being forced to essentially create new formations in an effort to disrupt pass protection, and hopefully have an unblocked man.

The current Ravens team is without a doubt this new hybrid defense.

I would argue that the Ravens schemes are 4-6-1, 2-5-4, 3-5-3, and even at times 1-5-5 and NOT the conventional 3-4/4-3 alignments.

The Ravens are prided on their versatility, and having players such as Suggs, Johnson, and Ngata are crucial to a variable defense.

In the 2-5-4 alignment. Ngata and Gregg would be your consistent down line-man while Suggs (WLB) Ray (MLB) Mclain (MLB) Elerbe (TLB) and Johnson (SLB) all consistently shift and adjust formation pre-snap in the 5-7 yard box. Obviously Reed, Landry, Fox, and w/e healthy corner starts make up the Defensive backfield.

The Ravens could greatly improve their team by drafting a stud defense end that could play the stand up role in such a abstract formation, as well as bring the heat with his knuckles white. Maybe just maybe Paul Kruger can put on quality lean muscle and be the heir to Pryce, which then pushes the need inside to replace the ever aging Gregg.

The Ravens...if forced to be conventional would be 3-4 beyond a shadow of a doubt due to our lack of TWO dominant inside lineman.




Sorry to run on and say a thousand things, but the in's and outs of football are my speciality.
[/quote]
Though the Ravens run a number of packages, they are, by personnel, a base 3/4 defense meaning schemes are run from a 3/4 alignment 70% of the time. Field and game situations dictate more exotic packages, nonetheless, personnel dictates the Ravens run all defensive packages from the base 3/4 alignment.

[wayne]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='30 March 2010 - 10:40 PM' timestamp='1270010423' post='384620']
This whole discussion goes to my fundamental beef with having Gregg Mattison as DC of the Ravens' defense. Everyone and anyone inside or outside the game of football realizes the Ravens have been the very best 3/4 or 46 defense over the last few years. Why in the world would Mattison suddenly decide to run schemes from a base 4/3 alignment with little blitzing? And why did it take nearly half the season of no pressure on opposing QB's and hanging the secondary out to dry to realize the base 4/3 idea was a huge miscalculation? That kind of wrongheaded thinking does not speak well for future prospects of this proud Ravens' defense.
[/quote]
I agree 100%, why fix something that was never broken, just add to it.

[XxSizzleXx]

[quote name='Kevin Mullins' date='30 March 2010 - 01:49 PM' timestamp='1269978580' post='384374']
Don't rule an in-house guy like Divens or McKinney out either. Personally I believe Ngata should be an end at all costs because of his mobility. He gets wasted if he gets trapped inside with a guard/center DT'ing him all the time. But he can beat any tackle or out-stepping guard at any time.
[/quote]

Exactly, which is why if a guy like Dan Williams were there in the draft we could not pass on him. Ngata-Williams-Redding on the front 3 with our LB's would be scary.

[kagejb]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='31 March 2010 - 12:40 AM' timestamp='1270010423' post='384620']
This whole discussion goes to my fundamental beef with having Gregg Mattison as DC of the Ravens' defense. Everyone and anyone inside or outside the game of football realizes the Ravens have been the very best 3/4 or 46 defense over the last few years. Why in the world would Mattison suddenly decide to run schemes from a base 4/3 alignment with little blitzing? And why did it take nearly half the season of no pressure on opposing QB's and hanging the secondary out to dry to realize the base 4/3 idea was a huge miscalculation? That kind of wrongheaded thinking does not speak well for future prospects of this proud Ravens' defense.
[/quote]
Gregg Mattison has always coached a 4-3 defense. He wants to stick to what he knows. We don't want to force him to coach something he doesn't have knowledge on. We switched because Rex runs a 3-4, and Mattison runs a 4-3.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='kagejb' date='31 March 2010 - 08:18 AM' timestamp='1270037884' post='384653']
Gregg Mattison has always coached a 4-3 defense. He wants to stick to what he knows. We don't want to force him to coach something he doesn't have knowledge on. We switched because Rex runs a 3-4, and Mattison runs a 4-3.
[/quote]


Then its' a matter of wrong coach, wrong time, wrong scheme. Changing the scheme to fit the coach instead of changing the coach to fit the scheme is a recipe for failure, especially for a team in the verge of serious SB contention.

[beasy2487]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='31 March 2010 - 12:51 AM' timestamp='1270011097' post='384622']
Though the Ravens run a number of packages, they are, by personnel, [b]a base 3/4 defense meaning schemes are run from a 3/4 alignment 70% of the time.[/b] Field and game situations dictate more exotic packages, nonetheless, personnel dictates the Ravens run all defensive packages from the base 3/4 alignment.
[/quote]

I don't understand why you repeatedly make up stats. 80% of the time TOP determines games, 70% of the Ravens defensive plays are run from a 3-4: Completely unsubstantiated.

Mattison is Mattison, Rex is Rex. Mattison is a GOOD COACH. We were the 3RD RANKED DEFENSE IN THE LEAGUE after losing so many players to injury and starting the year off terribly. Think about it, we were 18th in the league in sacks and yet 3rd in yards per game... He's doing something right. The man can make adjustments and he will, give him a chance to get his players in there and then make your judgments. FYI: When we won the super bowl we ran a base 4-3. It's not the SCHEME it's the EXECUTION that counts. Sheesh.

PS- Our defense didn't lose us any games last year from big plays. Our mistakes came in the form of penalties and a stagnant passing game late in the year. Time to stop beefing with Mattison and show some respect for your team's ability to put people in the right place to succeed.

[jravens13]

4-3 is dying in the NFL for a reason. There is too many holes in the passing game and not enough disguise. 3-4 teams are constantly making QB's look silly with zone blitzing and all the stunts that they can run.

And our Defense was definitely took time to adjust to Mattison, but by end of the season and the playoffs we I think we were playing better D than anyone.

[Bltravens]

The disgust with Mattison is puzzling, we couldnt keep Rex, so keeping his scheme was out of the question. Even if we had re-hired Nolan, his scheme is different than Rex's too. Nolan's defense fell apart the last 6 weeks of the season while Mattison's became one of the NFL's elite. Nolan had a better edge rushers, and a better secondary. You guys make it seem like anybody can learn Rex's system and just employ it, if that was the case why wouldnt every 3-4 D coordinator do it? Heres an even better example, Jim Johnson (rip) great DC, his disciple tried to run the exact same fire zone blitz scheme that Johnson employed in Philly for the past decade (and most people dont know, having the MOST efficient defense, points allowed, 3rd down %, yards in the entire NFL in those 10 years), and Phillys D was total mediocrity this year. Mattison's ability to adapt imo was impressive and in 2 games against the Colts he gave up what 2(?) more points in two games than Rex did in 1. Mattison had at his disposal, a 290 pound Suggs, a missing jack LB, 2 corners that didnt know how to play football for the first 10 weeks, 2 ACL tears in his secondary, a SS that was lost in the secondary for 3/4 of the season.