The wide nine defense puts added pressure on the linebackers and safeties. It forces them to come up and fill the voids in the c gaps left by the defensive ends lining up out wide. This means that linebackers and safeties have to regularly take on bigger linemen and tight ends in order to stop the run in those gaps. A responsibility that would normally be covered by bigger defensive ends in a traditional 4-3.
If you look at our major injuries on defense. Misi, Jenkins, Jones, and Abdul Qudus are the four players who went on injured reserve this season on defense. All of them either linebackers or safeties.
We didn't have any major injuries among the other units other than Xavien Howard who was already dealing with knee issues before the season began.
I blame the wide nine scheme for our increased injuries among the linebackers and safeties.
Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
-
-
Agree with Res and Gilvy...
Misi is injured and misses games every year. Jenkins is injured and misses games every year. Reshad Jones had the shoulder injury previously. IAQ got taken out on a hit by Rambo or Thomas on a WR scoring play downfield. Howard already had a knee injury from camp and re-aggravated it. Maxwell sprained his ankle. A common CB injury. Kiko broke his thumb. A common LB injury.
The scheme didn't cause this. If so, the backups and street JAGs would've also gone on IR. -
Think about this, what do Misi, Jenkins, Jones and Qudus all have in common? They all have c-gap responsibilities on either side of the field where they have to take on big linemen and tightends.
Thats why I prefer a traditional 4-3 where you let the big boys up front deal with the linemen and the linebackera and safeties act as safety valves to mop up whatever gets through. The wide nine on the other hand leaves wide open c-gaps that force the linebackers and safeties to do a job they are undersized for.
Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk -
If this theory was/is true then I think you'd more of such injuries in a 3-4 scheme, especially in a nickel package which most teams are running at least half the time these days.
I think you'd have to apply this theory to more than one scenario for it to be considered true. And to me on the surface it doesn't appear so.
I could certainly be wrong. But I don't see it as being scheme based. I think it's just football. We've had years where we've lost 3 olinemen in a season. That wasn't scheme based, it was just ****ty luck.danmarino and cuchulainn like this. -
Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk -
If you think that every safety in a 3-4 is bigger than Jones or IAQ I'd think you're wrong as well.
In the end it doesn't change the fact that I don't believe your premise to be true.resnor, danmarino, cuchulainn and 1 other person like this. -
-
-
dWreck, Rocky Raccoon and danmarino like this.
-
part of the reason is we have injury-proned players. Misi is always hurt. Jones plays like an animal, so not surprised this year. I will say this, we suffered about two years' worth of injuries, maybe we catch a break next year
-
-
Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk -
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk -
It would be a theory if you put the work in to determine how the players in question got injured, and if this was a factor in other Wide-9 schemes(or aggressive 1-gap schemes)
This is more you just throwing **** on the wall again.cuchulainn and resnor like this.