Doesn't TCU run a 4-2-5?

I think within the next 5 years you're going to have to be able to run both a 4-2-5 as well as a traditional 3-4 or 4-3. The spread is just too big of an influence, and you can't take the chance of your 225 lbs. linebacker getting matched up against a Percy Harvin

It is a 4-2-5. But a couple of points:

- I'd love to be able to find the % on what defensive formations LSU has used the past 3 years. I'd be willing to bet they played as much or more nickel as 4-3. So while it's different, it's not like going from the wishbone to the West Coast.

- According to the Phil Steele guide, the defense is designed so that the SLB makes most of the tackles. Apparently, that person has led TCU in tackles 3 years running. So there must be some fairly traditional principles in there to keep the LB's that clean.

- This is anecdotal, but it just seems like LA produces more safety types than LB types. The hills are full of 6'2", 210 types who can run - way more LaRon Landrys than Brady Jameses. And Bumpas turned Port Barre/JUCO product Marvin White, a guy LSU passed on twice, into a 5th round draft pick. So the 4-2-5 may actually play better into the hands of what LSU has to work with.

- Keep in mind also that TCU plays Utah every year, and my understanding is that they still use a lot of Urban Meyer's principles on offense. I don't have it in front of me, but I think Bumpas' defenses have played pretty well vs. Utah the past 4 years (correct me if I'm wrong). And playing UF every year, that's a good consideration for an LSU DC hire.

My major concern is that TCU always seems to have undersized DE's - the 6'4" 240 type that end up as tweeners in the NFL. But that may just be a product of what kind of talent TCU can get. If there's a kid 270 who can get to the QB, TCU probably never gets a crack at him. But if that's a philosophical part of Bumpas' defense, that could be a cause for concern.

Regardless of their conference, they're always a top defense. I think they lead the nation in sacks and rush yards allowed. They play aggressive. I'd like to have their DC but if there were an opening at LSU I don't think he'd want to come here. I wouldn't think he has much pressure at his current job and at LSU the DC job has to be as much of a pressure cooker as the HC job considering the emphasis fans place on defense.

quote:

---

I'd be willing to bet they played as much or more nickel as 4-3. So while it's different, it's not like going from the wishbone to the West Coast.

---

4-2-5 is not the nickel

quote:

---

My major concern is that TCU always seems to have undersized DE's - the 6'4" 240 type that end up as tweeners in the NFL. But that may just be a product of what kind of talent TCU can get.

---

or the need to have speed rushers on the edge

quote:

---

But if that's a philosophical part of Bumpas' defense, that could be a cause for concern.

---

eh...undersized DEs get a bad rap on this board b/c people idolize size

1st you have no grasp of the 4-2-5 or what it entails. It's probably one of the greatest schemes at stopping the spread. Now before you go on your little google rampage to research the 4-2-5 our personel fits this perfectly.

Philosophy doesn't change just scheme.

4-2-5 is also great when you need to adjust to multiple formations which seems to be a big thing now in cfb. Why wouldn't you want a more athletic defender guarding TE's and backs out the backfield?

Prepare for the counselor's retort.

quote:

---

And having "weak" LBs as you state is what makes the 4-2-5 perfect for LSU.

---

i don't think you read my comments

quote:

---

as I understand it, a 4-2-5 replaces a LB with a safery. A 4-3 nickel is supposed to replace a LB with a corner.

---

Technically yes but a nickelback just means 5. A fifth DB. Regardless if its a safety or corner