Can we drop this lie that we never attacked with the 4-3 and will with the 3-4? - Dallas Cowboys Forum

TruBlueCowboy · 05-05-2005

I've got to get this off my chest because I've been reading this a lot lately. Many fans are down on Zimmer for last year and accuse him of never employing an attack-oriented defense. They say he never blitzed and that the 3-4 will force him to do it.

My question is did any of you yokels who keep writing this actually watch the 2003 season? My god, we blitzed the hell out of teams, and we got burned plenty of times for it too! Mario Edwards became public enemy number one among Dallas Cowboy fans because he was usually the guy most suspectible to being burned when we went with cover zero.

Can we clear something up now? You can be an attacking defense in the 4-3 just as much as you can in the 3-4. The 3-4 simply gives you more versatility and that is all. If we lose half our starting secondary to injury just like last year, you're going to see the same conservative approach to the defense that you did last year. Becoming a 3-4 defense is not going to magically force Zimmer into being a more aggressive defensive coordinator.

If you want further proof, look at the Baltimore Ravens who are abandoning the 3-4 and going to the 4-3 and at the same time, are actually going to become a more aggressive defense under Buddy Ryan's son! The reason is because they have one of the best secondaries in the NFL!

I think a 3-4 team has advantages in that it is much easier to build than a 4-3 team, it gives a QB different looks and keeps him guessing, and allows the defensive coordinator more creativity in his play-calling. I don't think it applies any more pressure than a 4-3, though, if you have the right talent for your formation.

blindzebra · 05-05-2005

Of course you should know by now that the 3-4 is magical. Offenses mess their pants at the mere sight of the scheme. You just sprinkle the magic 3-4 dust on your players and sacks and turnovers just overflow.

5mics · 05-05-2005

Fans tend to over generalize and go w/ the "mob mentality" when things go bad. To support the point(s) they're trying to get across, sometimes the truth becomes a casualty in their rush to persecute the so-called "problem player or coach". It's both interesting and sad to see it unfold before you. I'm not sure what the answer is other than to NOT get caught-up in the hype and keep your objectivity, as hard as it may be.....

latest example:
Chargers 2003 - Schottenheimer(sp?) is a bum
Chargers 2004 - Schottenheimer is a genius

BadKarma · 05-05-2005

Agree with your post. We were blitzing pretty heavily mostly due to our inability to get to the quarterback. And when we did blitz, often times we paid for it.

We clearly didn't have the personnel to support much of any attack really in either 4-3 or 3-4. Our starters should have been 2nd and 3rd stringers on most teams.

JackMagist · 05-05-2005

Good luck with that TruBlue. I gave up early on here in trying to convince anyone that Zimmer is a much better coach than he is given credit for. He did a fine job in 2003 with marginal talent and his defense was the main reason we won 10 games. But you will now hear a litany of rhetoric from Hollywood Henderson and Wolverine about just how sorry he is and they will likely throw in some tired and inaccurate slams at Dat Nguyen for being too small (all of which is why I keep both of them on ignore most of the time).

While I do not agree with all of the things Zimmer does on defense I do recognize the things he does do right. I am glad to see that I am not the only one who gives him some credit.

**Reality** · 05-05-2005

The problem I've always had with blitzing is the WAY we blitzed. Most of the time we blitz up the middle, the defense shows the blitz before the snap and the offensive line knows where to block. On the fakes, most of the time they back out before the snap so again, the offensive line knows where to block. When we blitz from the corners we usually only blitz one side which makes it easy to pick up. Two outside blitzers can be blocked by one player because they are running full speed and it only takes a slight deflection block to take them completely out of the play.

The one thing we have rarely done is a delayed blitz. Delayed blitzes in my opinion get the best results .. have the linebackers or safeties wait in their normal position until AFTER the snap to start charging the line. By then, the OL is focused on their blocking assignments and cannot see the blitzers until it's too late. The few (and I mean VERY few) times we did this last year, it resulted in no gain or yards lost on the play.

That's what I love about the 3-4 .. the 3-4 defense will allow for blitzing from all over the field, where with the old 4-3, Zimmer usually only blitzed up the middle or all from one side. I can remember in 2003 when we had Woodson and Williams, he would send both on a blitz from each side and they'd meet at the quarterback. It was rare that a passing play would be completed when they blitzed like that. Without Woodson last year and with Williams playing FS most of the time, that pressure was missing.

cowboygolfer · 05-05-2005

I agree, and am alittle surpirsed we have not seen the WUSS tag thrown around on this thread yet.

Blitzing last year would have been disasterous, evidenced by the few times we tried it anyway. 2003 yealded the #1 defense because of a blowup safety and a leader in the secondary, last year that leader was gone and coverages were short lived.

I like the 3-4 as well, but our defensive problems last year had very little to do with coaching.

Waffle · 05-05-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackMagist

Good luck with that TruBlue. I gave up early on here in trying to convince anyone that Zimmer is a much better coach than he is given credit for. He did a fine job in 2003 with marginal talent and his defense was the main reason we won 10 games. But you will now hear a litany of rhetoric from Hollywood Henderson and Wolverine about just how sorry he is and they will likely throw in some tired and inaccurate slams at Dat Nguyen for being too small (all of which is why I keep both of them on ignore most of the time).

While I do not agree with all of the things Zimmer does on defense I do recognize the things he does do right. I am glad to see that I am not the only one who gives him some credit.

This is pretty straight on accurate.

Those other guys just hyper-bash Zimmer repeatedly in the name of screenname character development. "Schtick", if you will.

Zimmy Lives · 05-05-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Of course you should know by now that the 3-4 is magical. Offenses mess their pants at the mere sight of the scheme. You just sprinkle the magic 3-4 dust on your players and sacks and turnovers just overflow.

Offenses, and offensive coordinators, aren't afraid of schemes.

Do you think Terry Bradshaw would walk up to the LOS in the old days and cringe at the sight of the Flex defense? Hardly. He'd cringe at the sight of Ed Jones, Larry Cole, Randy White, and Harvey Martin.

TheEnigma · 05-05-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruBlueCowboy

I've got to get this off my chest because I've been reading this a lot lately. Many fans are down on Zimmer for last year and accuse him of never employing an attack-oriented defense. They say he never blitzed and that the 3-4 will force him to do it.

My question is did any of you yokels who keep writing this actually watch the 2003 season? My god, we blitzed the hell out of teams, and we got burned plenty of times for it too! Mario Edwards became public enemy number one among Dallas Cowboy fans because he was usually the guy most suspectible to being burned when we went with cover zero.

[View Full Quote]

If I remember correctly, there was an article mid-season last year that said that Zimmer was wanting to be more aggressive with the Defense and blitz more, but Parcells was the one who was asking for the conservative approach.

I always wanted to pull this out against Wolverine but I don't have hard evidence. Anybody else remember this?

blindzebra · 05-05-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

Offenses, and offensive coordinators, aren't afraid of schemes.

Do you think Terry Bradshaw would walk up to the LOS in the old days and cringe at the sight of the Flex defense? Hardly. He'd cringe at the sight of Ed Jones, Larry Cole, Randy White, and Harvey Martin.

You are new, so I'm not sure you got it.

That was sarcasm, so I agree with what you said.

Personnel is the key to any scheme.

Qwickdraw · 05-05-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

Offenses, and offensive coordinators, aren't afraid of schemes.

Do you think Terry Bradshaw would walk up to the LOS in the old days and cringe at the sight of the Flex defense? Hardly. He'd cringe at the sight of Ed Jones, Larry Cole, Randy White, and Harvey Martin.

I think he was kidding Zimmy. Being sarcastic. And I found it hilarious blindzebra, BTW.

This is one of the best threads I have read in a long time.
I was going to quote the first thread and applaud it but as I read down I came across a number of other posts that were worthy of being quoted and applauded as well.
Nice job guys. Every post here in this thread was enlightnening and was dead on the mark. I'm serious.

Billy Bullocks · 05-05-2005

Of course our D was soft last year. We could have been in a 3-4 last year too, it wouldnt matter, when you have 7th rounders and players off other teams practice squads starting for you, your defense will not be very effective.

I agree totally with people thinking that the 3-4 is the magical ingridient missing, its just stupid. As far as I know, Carolina and Philly get after the QB very well, and they run a 4-3. It's all about having playmakers, which we have lacked so much recently. Glover and Ellis were drawing double teams all day, and the other guys couldnt produce a lick. If you can't beat a tackle one on one you shouldnt be in the NFL, at least starting. IT wasn't the scheme, it was the players.

Folks, lets face it, our record pretty accurately reflected our team last year. I know Injuries definately slowed us down ALOT, but come on, with unproven, young corners, you wont win alot in this league.

Crown Royal · 05-05-2005

I have reservations about Zimmer, but they are purely philosophical and don't make him a poor coach. I have the same reservations about Monte Kiffin....but he is a very good DC.

We blitzed a lot, but it was not gap attacking blitz.....I could wright a multi-paragraph post on this, but my arm hurts. I will say that I hope he has learned about gaps in the 3-4...if so, our D should be much better.

Hostile · 05-06-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zimmy Lives

Offenses, and offensive coordinators, aren't afraid of schemes.

Do you think Terry Bradshaw would walk up to the LOS in the old days and cringe at the sight of the Flex defense? Hardly. He'd cringe at the sight of Ed Jones, Larry Cole, Randy White, and Harvey Martin.

Post of the day.