Post by broncobilly on Jul 1, 2023 8:51:03 GMT -5
I’d like to get in front of the trend to move away from the traditional DT/DE/OLB/ILB to the newer designations of DL/Edge/LB. I believe we are seeing mfl beginning their recognition of this trend with the relabeling of traditional 3-4 DEs to DTs and 3-4 OLBs to DEs. 4-3 positions are remaining intact so we are getting kind of a mix that has bolstered the DT and DE pool while reducing the LB pool. If we need to retool our starting requirements to react to the possible relabeling I’d rather that we aren’t reacting but instead are prepared for it.
Looking at it generically, 3-4 Ds are now under mfl positions starting 3 DTs, 2 DEs, and 2 LBs. 4-3 Ds are starting 2 DTs, 2 DEs, and 3 LBs. The days of teams running 4 LBs are pretty much completely gone. We also still have the nickel and dime D formations so our start 2-3 CBs and 2-3 Ss requirements seem pretty solid.
If we change our starting requirements to accommodate the new labels, to account for typical base formations, starting D requirements probably should be morphing to something more like this:
2-3 DTs
2 DEs
2-3 LBs
2-3 Ss
2-3 CBs
That would only flex 1 D player. If we recognize that some teams are moving a S into the middle rather than a traditional ILB, we could reduce required relabeled LBs to 1 rather than 2, giving 2 flex spots rather than 1. Starting requirements would then be:
2-3 DTs
2 DEs
1-3 LBs
2-3 Ss
2-3 CBs
Then if mfl does indeed go to DL/Edge designations, that would be resolved by a simple relabeling of our starting positions.
I’ll let my thoughts stand there and let others jump in with their thoughts.
Looking at it generically, 3-4 Ds are now under mfl positions starting 3 DTs, 2 DEs, and 2 LBs. 4-3 Ds are starting 2 DTs, 2 DEs, and 3 LBs. The days of teams running 4 LBs are pretty much completely gone. We also still have the nickel and dime D formations so our start 2-3 CBs and 2-3 Ss requirements seem pretty solid.
If we change our starting requirements to accommodate the new labels, to account for typical base formations, starting D requirements probably should be morphing to something more like this:
2-3 DTs
2 DEs
2-3 LBs
2-3 Ss
2-3 CBs
That would only flex 1 D player. If we recognize that some teams are moving a S into the middle rather than a traditional ILB, we could reduce required relabeled LBs to 1 rather than 2, giving 2 flex spots rather than 1. Starting requirements would then be:
2-3 DTs
2 DEs
1-3 LBs
2-3 Ss
2-3 CBs
Then if mfl does indeed go to DL/Edge designations, that would be resolved by a simple relabeling of our starting positions.
I’ll let my thoughts stand there and let others jump in with their thoughts.
