View Single Post
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 04-30-2009, 03:02 PM
ant80 ant80 is offline
Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,599
Points: 3,249.79
Bank: 0.00
Total Points: 3,249.79
ant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesque
ant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesqueant80 is Tresselesque
Quote:
Originally Posted by RB07OSU View Post
I think the 3-3-5 is more viable with our skill set:
DL: Heyward (DE), Denlinger (NG), Gibson (DE) (rotate Wilson, Larimore, Thomas and/or Rose, Goebel, Williams)
LB: Sabino (ILB), Homan (ILB), Spitler (ILB), Moeller (OLB), Rolle (OLB)
DB: Chekwa (CB), Amos/Torrence (CB), Coleman (S), Russel (S), Hines (S)

Note: I realize the positions have different terms but with the undersized LB's/S types we have, I think we can get the best talent of the field with this set and rotate the DL. Obviously this wouldn't be a base set but I think it could be a good change of pace. Not sure how much work it takes schematically but the players seem to be there. Question for grad...would this be viable to run situationally or would it take too much time to work?
Come on. Weren't we all making fun of RR because he wants to run the 3-3-5 in the Big10? I still don't think that's a good idea in the Big10.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.09918 seconds with 9 queries