Ruby Package (3-2-6) for Titans D

said that it isn't necessarily putting the best defenders on the field. It is who would best fit into that formation IMO. I chose to put Smith in there because while he did suck at a 4-3 DT, he did pretty well in KC as a 3-4 NT. His problem here is that he didn't penetrate. He was taught to hold the POA in the 3-4 D, and he had trouble adjusting. I am saying with 3 down lineman we should approach it more like a 3-4 D. Smith has experience holding his spot and eating up blockers in the 3-4 so I put him in there. We don't really have anyone else with that experience. The only other options would be Casey/Martin really.

I really like the addition of Wimbley to the team, but in this hypothetical situation, I don't see him as much of a fit. In a typical 3-4 he is a pass rushing LB ... that is what he did in Oakland. In this case though, you don't really have those pass rushing LBs. Since there were only 2 spots available for LBs I used guys that play LB every down and can offer more of what the traditional LB offers.

In real life (cause I doubt we ever really run this, and in my original post even said that I wouldn't want to run this package very often at all) I would stick with the 4-3 base D, and use Wimbley - Casey - Martin - Morgan on the DL. I think that is the best option, but I was just thinking what I would do in the case of the 3-2-6 formation.

 

I'd rather run a more traditional 34 front than that.

 

I agree, I don't really like this "Ruby" defense ... I think it is kinda dumb. I was just taking a more hypothetical just for fun approach and see what the best I could come up with in that situation. In real life I would probably never run the Ruby.