Could the 3-4 Switch Hurt the Packers Defense More than Help It?

Throughout the past month or so, a lot has been made of the Green Bay Packers' defensive switch from a base 4-3 to a 3-4. After the season that the Packers' defense put us through last season, the change was almost universally accepted among writers on this site—including me.

But is it possible that the switch is going to worsen the Packers' defense rather than strengthen it?

For the first signs of evidence to this claim, look no further than personnel.

In my opinion, even following last season's disaster, the Packers had entrenched starters next season in the 4-3 at both defensive ends (Aaron Kampman and Cullen Jenkins), one defensive tackle (Ryan Pickett), two linebackers (A.J. Hawk and Nick Barnett), and three defensive backs (Charles Woodson, Nick Collins, and Al Harris).

That only left the need for serious improvements at three positions: one defensive tackle spot, outside linebacker, and strong safety—the latter being debatable as the 2007 version of Atari Bigby is a starter.

However, now that we have fully committed to the 3-4, there are question marks up and down the defensive roster.

At defensive end, we have possibly one solidified starter in Jenkins. I've heard many rumblings that he may not be the right type of player for end in this scheme, and it is going to severely hamper his rapidly evolving pass rushing skills for next season and beyond. Now, we have a glaring need for not one, but possibly, two defensive ends that are big enough to play in this system.

Defensive tackle is where things get really messy. Tackle is widely regarded as the single most important position in a 3-4, and it's anyone's guess if we have someone on our current roster that can play that position to the level it takes for the scheme to work.

It's no mystery as to why the likes of Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and New England have some of the best 3-4 defenses, and it's because they have players like Haloti Ngata, Casey Hampton, and Vince Wilfork clogging up the middle of offensive lines.

Unless someone can give me a compelling case as to how someone on our roster is comparable to the three players that I just mentioned, let's add this to our list of needs this offseason.

Let's move to linebackers. In the middle, we'll presumably have Hawk and Barnett. Hawk seems to fit the mold best, but in no way is Nick Barnett a 3-4 inside linebacker. The prototypical inside linebacker in the 3-4 is big, with the ability to take on blockers in the hole.

Maybe it's just me, but Barnett doesn't fit that description one bit—he's best when he is free to roam and can make tackles in space. I wouldn't call inside linebacker a need, but it's something to definitely keep your eye on.

And what about the outside linebackers? They have to be destructive in this scheme, and on one side you'll see Aaron Kampman—arguably one of the top five defensive ends in the NFL—with a whole new set of responsibilities. Does he have the ability to make the transition?

In any case, it's definitely a risky idea moving your best defensive player into a new position. And even more definitively, if this move doesn't work out, this defense doesn't work.

Then we have the great mystery of the other outside linebacker. This is obviously an area that we have to address this offseason, because frankly, I don't want to see Brandon Chillar or Brady Poppinga starting at this spot.

There are options here—drafting Brian Orakpo or Everette Brown, or in the free agent market—but general manager Ted Thompson absolutely has to upgrade this position.

And you can't forget about the defensive backs. This may seem like only a front seven switch, but in most 3-4 cases, zone coverage is asked out of the defensive secondary. For a group that has run strictly bump-and-run coverage the past couple of years, this maybe a rougher transition than many think.

The philosophical switch puts Al Harris' Packer career in jeopardy, and after Woodson and Tramon Williams, the Packers' cornerback depth is fairly scarce. Many draft experts have Green Bay taking a cornerback (most frequently Malcolm Jenkins, Ohio State) with their 9th pick, which means other important areas won't be fixed with an impact guy in the draft.

Also, can Nick Collins and Atari Bigby be Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu types? Safeties garner a lot of responsibility in the 3-4, and who knows if either is up to the task—including the Pro Bowler Collins.

Now, let's re-examine the Packers' needs now in the 3-4 scheme: one, possibly two defensive ends, prototypical nose tackle, one outside linebacker, depth at middle linebacker and cornerback, and the aforementioned strong safety.

The fact of the matter is, finding players who fit these descriptions has become a lot harder in the 3-4 than finding guys who fit into the 4-3. We've increased our needs on a defense that was only a couple of injuries and pieces away from being a pretty good unit.

You must remember: in 2007, we had nearly an identical defensive roster (with a 4-3), and we ranked in the top 15 in nearly every defensive category. We have one year of injuries and genuine bad luck and we need to blow the whole thing up?

But it doesn't stop there. How fast, realistically, can we expect defensive coordinator Dom Capers to implement this new scheme? With every single player on our current roster scheduled to learn am entirely new defense, can we expect our defense to be better next season? There has to be a learning curve, right?

And trust me, just switching to the 3-4 doesn't guarantee results, no matter what the timeline. Just ask the San Francisco 49ers how many playoff berths they've accumulated since making the switch. That number right before one; what is it again? You guessed it math geniuses, zero!

I want to be optimistic about the next season and tell you all that we're going back to the playoffs. But the reality in Titletown is just because we're switching to a 3-4 doesn't mean improvement.

In fact, it could mean the exact opposite next season. Another season like last season, and who knows what your 2010 version of the Green Bay Packers will look like—from the front office to the field.

Just declaring us a new defensive scheme was far and away the easiest part; the hardest part is just beginning, my friends.