Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishknight1023  This is confusing but i'll relay what i've heard. Weis has our defensive line setup as a DE NT and DT....With Cwynar being the DE....Newman(hopefully) being NT....and Hafis being the DT. The NT lines up over center obviously, and the DT( which is a DE in the 3-4, but Weis calls it a DT because the lineup on the strong side or something and more on the inside of the line so it would be like a DT run stuffer kind of how Hafis Williams is. As we all know Cwynar is a pass rushing end already in HS so he would be on the Weak Side DE to rush with more freedom. If you are confused i am sorry because thats the best i can describe it without confusing myself. It's just Charlie and his wierd terminology again i guess. |
Excellent analysis IK1023, it explains Hafis's use of the DT tag more clearly.
One thing that CW did say when he first talked about the 3-4 is that he would prefer not to use SDE (or DT in the other terminology) & WDE (or DE in the other terminology) personnel because then the D has to adjust its' alignment to the Offensive formation. His preference was to have two book-end DE's (LDE/RDE) who line up in the same spot (left & right of the NG) on every play, regardless of where the strong-side of the offensive formation is. From a personnel standpoint at the present time, the SDE(DT)/NG/WDE formation seems most likely, but if ND were to snag a Marcus Forston type who is virtually the same size as Cwynar, then the book end DE formation may become a reality in two years or so. From that point on, that would seem to be the optimum scenario for the DL when it is in the 3-4. Even without Forston, Hafis Williams may end up being a book-end to Cwynar, and they may be able to go LDE/NG/RDE with Cwynar, Newman? /Williams.
I hope so at least, and then we would not have to deal with so many tags.
