Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

We all know we need some. We need to take a chance on a couple 3 and 2 stars, there are a couple left. It's too bad Risean Broussard can't make grades because we could use him...anyone have ideas for who we should offer? chime in...

Unless we steal someone from another school.... I think that we may just end up with what we already have and hoping for better results next year.

Well that leaves us 5 DT's including Remington...we're gonna have to play a 3-4, should be interesting...

I'm sure we'll snag a couple 2*s from Hawaii. Kinda like we did with Keliikipi last year

Well we're still big players for Heimuli. Then BIG Jerrell Gordon is still on the board w/o any offers. Jordan Turner has an impressive interest list, but no offers. And Troy Boyland looks as if he's going to walk-on.

I've heard Heimuli was either UCLA or Utah but maybe we'll get lucky with him or Potoae, we could use them both!

TriDuck wrote:Well we're still big players for Heimuli. Then BIG Jerrell Gordon is still on the board w/o any offers. Jordan Turner has an impressive interest list, but no offers. And Troy Boyland looks as if he's going to walk-on.

Where'd you heare Boyland would walk on? Dude is a monster: http://rivals.yahoo.com/oregon/football ... land-98520

Well he doesn't have any offers, and Oregon is high on his list on his Scout profile

ljginger wrote:Well that leaves us 5 DT's including Remington...we're gonna have to play a 3-4, should be interesting...

UHHHHH.... that's a negative on the 3-4. Doesn't work like that.

In a 3-4 defense you essentially play 3 DT's. In a 4-3 you play 2 tackles and 2 ends. With the lack of DT's it makes a whole lot more sense to play a 4-3.

ARGHimaPirate wrote:In a 3-4 defense you essentially play 3 DT's. In a 4-3 you play 2 tackles and 2 ends. With the lack of DT's it makes a whole lot more sense to play a 4-3.

When u play a 3-4, don't you usually play with 1 big space eating DT and then DE's around him.. But, I might add seems like a longshot anyway, because we don't have any big space filling DT's. So a 4-3 is more likely.

ARGHimaPirate wrote:In a 3-4 defense you essentially play 3 DT's. In a 4-3 you play 2 tackles and 2 ends. With the lack of DT's it makes a whole lot more sense to play a 4-3.

This is sort of accurate if we're talking about the NFL.

This is not the NFL.

This is college. And it's the Pac 10 - where, unless you're playing Stanford, having speed on the field is not a bad thing.

The point that the guy is trying to make, and the one I tried to make last week, is that we'll probably HAVE TO limit our reps for our DTs, and one of the ways we can get around that is by putting in more 3-4 schemes to get another linebacker out on the field.

In a perfect world, yeah, to run a 3-4 you want 3 Haloti Ngatas, but as we're all well aware, this isn't a perfect world. As is, we're going to be running short of DTs just to practice against.

Just pray we don't have any major injuries at DT next year or the year after....


We might just have an all-walk on Defensive Line hahahaha

vagusnerve wrote:Just pray we don't have any major injuries at DT next year or the year after....


We might just have an all-walk on Defensive Line hahahaha

That is the biggest thing I'm worried about since there is no depth in case of injury. Plus, after next season, we are going to have to depend on so many JCs and FR on our depth chart, who usually don't start producing until at least their second year in the program.

I wonder if the coaches are as nervous and fearful as we fans are about the future of the Ducks D-line? We are pretty stacked at most positions so i hope they put most of their effort into getting a handful of talented DL's next season.