Back in Black: A Raiders Dynasty - Week 3!

[/td][/tr][/table]

AFC South (Season)



AFC West (Season)

[/center]

The Raiders and defensive coordinator John Marshall have announced an official switch to the 3-4 defense today. There are compelling reasons to go back to a 3-4 defensive front seven, considering Oakland used the 3-4 set successfully from 1976 through 1989, winning 62% of the games. By contrast, since converting to a 4-3 Defensive (2 DTs, 2DEs, 2 OLBs and 1 MLB) we have won only 52% of our games. Incidentally, in all three SB Championship victories and the seasons leading up to those Super Bowls, Oakland used the 3-4 defense.

While no one will attribute the successes or failures solely to the configuration of the front 7, the use of current talent is a major factor to the results in the win/loss column. Therefore, after considering the current player strengths and weaknesses and the inherent advantages of the 3-4 Defense scheme, the benefits of reinstalling the 3-4 should be clear.

Consider the strength at DE: Matt Shaughnessy, Jay Richardson and Rich Seymour. Richardson and Seymour are prototype DEs in the 3-4 scheme, stalwart and quick.

Consider the DT weakness: the sometimes terrific Gerard Warren lacks consistency and Tommy Kelly can't be described any better. These DTs are quick but not huge and have been pushed around in the interior on too many occasions, but they might work out as DEs in a 3-4 set.

Now consider the LB strength and weakness: Thomas Howard and Trevor Scott on the outside are doing a great job; MLB Kirk Morrison is a sure but soft tackler who isn't a true MLB (can't intimidate or direct play) but either a misplaced ILB in a 4-3 set.

The Oakland Press caught up with D.C. John Marshall at his official press conference today.


O.P: It's our understanding that you helped install the 3-4 in San Francisco, but why did you see fit to do this with our current roster?

J.M.: Truth be told, there are different forms of 3-4 defenses, fairly radically different too. There will likely be as many sub packages (non-3-4 looks) as 3-4 looks.

O.P.: Any concerns that your current roster lacks the athletes to properly implement this scheme?

J.M.: No matter what way you line up out there, good defense comes down to proper execution. Regardless, I'm not going to pigeonhole guys into situations in which they cannot successfully play in.

O.P.: As we know, the nose tackle is the most important piece of a 3-4 defense. It's very hard to find ones that aren't too tall, but are big enough to stand their ground even if they get double teamed. Do you feel we have one on this roster?

J.M.: I believe we have what it takes to make it happen.

O.P.: Who will that player be?

J.M.: There will be competition. It's too early to tell.

O.P.: In recent years, the defense has ran the same basic 4-3, man-to-man scheme. Can we expect more exotic looks? Do you plan to move Nnamdi around? Will he be used like Revis in New York?

J.M.: Well, we'll have plenty of different packages and plenty of personnel running through. Exotic? That's debatable. Revis is Revis, but I'm very excited to plug Nnamdi in. They're both great players.

O.P.: Can you guarantee improvement even with our current roster that seems to lack the players needed for success?

J.M.: Look, the 3-4 is a very specialized defense, but it's just a scheme. We aren't the only ones running it in the NFL, and it's not a best kept secret. I'm fully aware that each position requires something quite different from both a technique and physical skill-set point of view. Either way, we look forward to getting on the field and making it happen.

Time will tell if Oakland made a positive change, but at least they're attempting to change. All things considered, if we were to install the 3-4 today it would look much like this:

RDE - M. Shaughnessy
LDE - R. Seymour
NT - T.Kelly

ROLB - K. Wimbley
LOLB - T. Howard
RILB - R. Brown
LILB - R. McClain

SS - T.Branch
FS - M. Huff
RCB - N. Asomugha
LCB - C. Johnson

A 3-4 will require a stud Nose Tackle by way of the draft next year or free agency. Most likely, an upgrade at Linebacker would help as well. Either way, things are either on their way up in Oakland, or about to come crashing down.

Not a problem at all man, thanks for checking it out.

I'll probably just skip the pre-season stuff this year, because I advanced to the regular season not realizing I couldn't go back and get the scores/stats. Oh well, to the regular season we go!

(I know you haven’t looked at the film yet, but when you do, will you be surprised that this wasn't a loss?)

I'll just say this.. I thought our offensive line did well establishing the line of scrimmage. When you're calling plays, that's something I particularly pay a lot of attention to. I thought our defensive line struggled, but we knew this was going to be a battle that started up front and I don't need to see the film to say that we definitely didn't play our best.

(Considering what the special teams did for you, does it feel like a big win?)

Absolutely. Every game you win at this level is a big win. Everybody knows what the score is. We're at one win, and we're happy about it.

(You've seen your quarterbacks have some bad performances over the past couple years, but how would you characterize this one, considering what Jason went through?)

Well, it wasn't one of his better ones, because I pay more attention to the decisions and the ball accuracy. I thought he was off all day, but we had a few drops as well, and that didn't help matters. Although he definitely needs to play better.

(The positives?)

I was proud of how our special teams played, because we knew we had to do a very good job there. We were able to get a few turnovers, put ourselves in good field position, and when it mattered in the end we executed. Turnovers are always a big emphasis in meetings, and today the takeaways came and the game fell in place for us.

(Is it safe to say Darren will get the game ball?)

Well, *chuckles*, he and the five guys paving the road in front of him all deserve a little something after that performance. I felt like we dominated the point of attack, which is always a point of emphasis in practice. It was a good performance, we'll continue to build on it.

(The defense gave up a few big plays, but stayed solid in the red zone. Was this something you worked on?)

Of course, it's something we go through every practice. We don't mind giving up the yards if we can keep the points off the board.

(After Jason Campbell's performance last week, did you place an extra emphasis on the rushing attack this week?)

We felt that our running game matched up well against the St. Louis defense. I know what I have with Campbell, and I think he's more than a game manager. It just so happened that he didn't have to do too much today to get the win. I doubt you'll hear him complain.

(Any news on the Tyvon Branch and Tommy Kelly injuries?)

Unfortunately, it didn't look too good for either. Both were taken to the locker room. I don't have a timetable for them, but I'll have a better idea once I talk to the staff.

Ha, we'll see after the cupcake portion of my schedule is over. Rams and Cardinals are easily two of the worst teams in the game.

Thanks!