Hmm. I think we need some fact checking. Or at least fact defining.
Can a statement qualified with "almost none" really be taken as fact, brother?
Besides ...
Orakpo? Kemoeatu? Carriker? Wilson? Jarmon? None of these guys are "3-4 type players" or going to be here?
Henson? Riley? Blades? None of them pique your interest?
Another draft and FA period this coming spring to add more players specifically tailored to the 3-4 doesn't seem likely?
Examples? With "getting better," "dumping resources" and "guru" defined?
We don't know that the scheme is flawed. We know there have been some ugly broken coverages and an uneven learning curve. Ten games is not even close to enough to determine if the sytem is "flawed" or we're just looking at issues with its components or implementation.
I'd say that was "fact" but I'd be overstating it. Call it a strongly held opinion.
Haslett may or may not be a great defensive coordinator. I suspect he's not, and was probably the first to question his hire and back it with an objective look at his history. But it's hyperbole to say he doesn't know what he's doing.
Man was hired to convert a 4-3 to a 3-4. It was not his choice, it was his head coach's. His future HOF head coach's. He is working with what he inherited and with talent brought in to run the 4-3 over many years. There was an expectation it would take some time. It has.
It has also been about what we should have expected--inconsistent. Sometimes brilliant, sometimes awful. It has also contributed directly to several of the surprising 5 wins this 4-12 team has already compiled through its first ten games.
Oh ... and Haslet also didn't inherit the Steelers' personnel, which has been assembled over several years to run a very specific scheme.
And that is a fact.
Ok for starters go read the 3-4 thread I posted, I dont want to respost everything because its actually quite in depth, it details EVERY TEAM THAT CHANGED TO A 3-4, how they did it and the major changes it entailed.
as for starters, Carriker and Rak should be the only starters who arent replaced this offseason as they are the only ones in the front seven who havent been terrible in the 3-4. none of the other guys you mentioned have shown us anything at all, Kemo perhaps may come back from the achilles injury but thus far has not. Wilson is a back up nothing more and hasnt beaten out A GUY WHO CONVERTED FROM DTACKLE FFS. and Jarmon thus far has shown that he has talent but is far more fitted to a 4-3. as for everyone else, if I havent mentioned them its because its easier to list who would fit BECAUSE ALMOST NOONE IN THIS FRONT SEVEN DOES.
Blades is too small and slow (some small guys did really well inside in the 3-4 , Mills on the saints, fletch on the rams but they had crazy speed and instincts.) but they were the exception. Riley who knows he hasnt shown anything this year and neither has henson.
exactly my whole point OM is that if this defence needs at least one (and more likely two) free agency periods and drafts before it even becomes viable then how exactly is being patient helping? this defence should never have been installed and any decent DC could have told shanny this was a terrible idea. the reason most 3-4 conversions worked was because teams had the players to make it work, we didnt, its hard to imagine a team MORE built for a 4-3 than us,we have no depth at either OLB or DT both key spots for switching.
Getting better ? almost every 3-4 swap team had increases in all the key stats in its first year when teams made the switch without trying to hide it in a hybrid (the only hybrids who worked were the patsies and Ravens both of whome dedicated picks and free agents to making the swap. check my 3-4 thread for details.
Guru as in a coach who had demonstrated succsess in the 3-4 not a guy whose best defences were even top 10 and who took over a defence in pittsburgh that got worse the longer he was there (that does not bode well for us btw.)
You arent a DC so I will forgive you for not seeing that the scheme is flawed, you dont need multiple games to see if a scheme is flawed OM, I will give you a few examples. but the most glaring thing is that any good defence will get better as the season goes on because you have more film to watch of your opponent we have gotten worse much worse.
Much of Hasletts scheme involved playing soft zones combined with blitzing, this is not a bad way to generate turnovers however, when you blitz and have a zone behind it you leave holes, now how you cover those holes is how you determine if a scheme is sound, if you dont cover them it is not sound. I have seen us blitz a corner and rather than have an OLB or safety cover the hole, Ive seen receivers run free, thats not always a blown coverage or It wouldnt happen with regularity. I have also seen us blitz 2 linebackers and let slot and RB receivers WIDE OPEN in the short middle, if you do it once in a while it can confuse a young QB but against a solid team or even just a heady QB it will get you killed (texans game?)
now this part is something you can confirm with someone who knows defence OM, you dont always have to have a guy right in the hole to cover for someone blitzing, you just have to have someone in the passing lane and a safety over the top, BUT YOU HAVE BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHERE THAT LANE WILL BE, ergo you watch film and see where the QB will throw when pressured. the Steelers are great at this, they have 2 OLB's who may not be pure cover guys but notice how they get picks? they are in position and the announcer often says "the QB didnt even see him and just threw the ball"
I think you have drunk the koolaid to be so excited about "this 4 win team" winning 5 games, I would except that the Dolphins took a 1-11 team and went to the playoffs while building a decent team. I expected improvement after we upgraded our offence (which was terrible) at several spots the main one being the Oline. Add a decent offence to last years defence and we make the playoffs! last year 4 wins after going through such an injury riddled season was not that bad, we never really got blown out except against a couple powerhouse teams and we lost how many games by less than a fg? this team was primed for a turnaround but we havent seen much thus far other than the team is playing with more passion on defence (and I attribute that to the agression in the scheme not the scheme) dont forget Blache was decent but not aggressive and he did misuse AH as well.
This year we have been relatively healthy (until last game) while last year we were the walking wounded.
as for what Haslett was given? a top five team defencively, BUT I agree,This team has one player who is very good in a 3-4 and plays at a probowl level in a 3-4 and one decent one who has bursts of decency and it has 2 who played at a probowl level and one who was a dmvp level in a 4-3 2 years ago and pretty damn good last year, and OM that is a FACT. lol
 }})
