4-3 vs 3-4 and Quinn

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,351
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
its a simplified explanation. but over all the 3-4 and 4-3 have blended over time....one simple difference is the stand up DE. and in a 3-4, in old days, used to be a LB, true LB, but over time given its success in pass rushing (and how they disguised the designated pass rushers), the OLBs on the weak side (even some on strong side) became designated pass rushers, ala Ware. I doubt if Ware ever dropped into pass coverage, but he was considered a LB. Parcells tried the same thing with Ellis on the strong side and had limited success

its mostly around how you line up, between the tackles, as well as which shoulder of the tackle. its not necessarily just between tackles, DEs can line up on the inside shoulder or outside shoulder....

but most 3-4, the OLB on the weak side is a stand up pass rusher. allows them to get a better view of back field and pre-snap movements and most of these pass rushers have a easier time starting the rush from standup position, that gives them a step up (or faster)....last year they tried to make Lawrence into a stand up pass rusher and he struggled with his initial step. it wasn't an easy transition for him and he went back to his hands down on the ground and had more success.

I assume this year gregory will be the stand up pass rusher. most of these guys are on the smaller side and in the 3-4 the DL alignment are slightly different, including what they do. sometimes the DE lines up between the guard and tackle or over the guard or I have seen them line up over tackle, then overloading one side of the line up. forcing offensive pass blocking....it also depends on the personnel you have, but I go back to my initial statement, these days most teams run a blend of 3-4 or 4-3. its hard to distinguish sometimes. not many teams run a true 3-4 (like pittsburgh)....

DLaw did not go to more hand on the ground. He had that option but declined. It was Griffen that went back to hand down.
- DLaw appeared to like standing up and playing 3-4 OLB.

Ware did drop into coverage but far less than Spencer.

If there are not 3 DL between the outside shoulders of the OTs or within a few inches of being in that area, then it's not a 3-4 concept.

If fans want to know which concept is being used then looking at how many DL are between the OTs is a better method than looking at how many players are hand-down vs standing.

Atlanta often played a 4 man DL but with the DEs standing up. Just standing up didn't make them LBs.

Standing up is not done to make it easier to pass rush. The majority of 3-4 OLBs play hand-down in Nickel.

The biggest advantage of standing up is with regards to outside run contain. It is equivalent to giving the DE 1 or 2 extra steps towards the sideline on outside run plays. Obviously it also helps to see the action in the backfield.

The 3-4 is a run defense alignment. It is never used in obvious passing situations (i.e. 3rd and long, etc.).
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,351
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Bad comparison, I would use the Seattles’s 4-3 which fits Dallas the best.

That alignment is a 3-4 concept despite 4 DL with their hand-down.

3 DL between the OTs.

NT at zero tech (Head up on the OC).

If the left edge player stands up then it is identical to a standard 3-4.

That alignment is still a hybrid concept.

The opposite is also true. A team can use a 4 man DL concept with 1 or both DEs standing up.
- It is still a 4 man DL concept. Just standing up does not convert DEs to OLBs.
 

Whyjerry

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,949
Reaction score
24,814
That is a silly fan response that I see often.

Coaches refer to run defense as "base".

Base is not a reference to the formation that is used most often.

Lol. Silly fan response…

So when is Bama hiring you to replace Saban? Btw thanks so much for spending time with us fans. You must be so busy getting your Madden lineups set.
 

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,159
Reaction score
17,680
DLaw did not go to more hand on the ground. He had that option but declined. It was Griffen that went back to hand down.
- DLaw appeared to like standing up and playing 3-4 OLB.

Ware did drop into coverage but far less than Spencer.

If there are not 3 DL between the outside shoulders of the OTs or within a few inches of being in that area, then it's not a 3-4 concept.

If fans want to know which concept is being used then looking at how many DL are between the OTs is a better method than looking at how many players are hand-down vs standing.

Atlanta often played a 4 man DL but with the DEs standing up. Just standing up didn't make them LBs.

Standing up is not done to make it easier to pass rush. The majority of 3-4 OLBs play hand-down in Nickel.

The biggest advantage of standing up is with regards to outside run contain. It is equivalent to giving the DE 1 or 2 extra steps towards the sideline on outside run plays. Obviously it also helps to see the action in the backfield.

The 3-4 is a run defense alignment. It is never used in obvious passing situations (i.e. 3rd and long, etc.).
OK, if that's the case I stand corrected, but I thought I read a couple of articles and rumors that D Law didn't like rushing from stand up position. I have to watch some film to see what he was doing.

Ware dropped from time to time, just so to disguise it, but he did it so rarely. even in 4-3, I have seen DL men drop back sometimes, just to confuse the OL. I forgot about Spencer, yeah, he was a big liability in coverage.

I agree, standing up doesn't necessarily make them a LB....that's not what I meant........standing up often also gives those LBs some space between them and OT, and usually LBs are quicker, so to put the Tackle in a disadvantage. if they line up with hands on the ground on either shoulder of the tackle, the tackle is able to get hands on them a lot faster....the goal is to get them having a step advantage using their speed including outside runs and give separation between them and blockers.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
  • Instead of focusing on the number of players with their hand down...
  • I like to just look at the number of DL between the outside shoulders of the OTs.
    • The 3-4 has 3 DL in that area.
    • The 4-3 has 2 DL in that area.
    • If there are 3 DL in that area but 4 with their hand down, it's really a 3-4 concept.
    • The DEs in a 4-3 can stand up but it doesn't really make them LBs.
  • Note: A 3-3-5 is the exact opposite of a 3-4.
    • It uses 4-3 type DEs with 1 DT (i.e. 1 DL between the OTs).
Atlanta with Quinn as Head Coach played both 3-4 and 4-3.

This is a 3-4 alignment from 2020:
This is a nickel package against 11 personnel, there has to be another WR off the screen. The SAM (43, Walker) has rolled outside rolled to the 7 to set the edge, Mike (45, Jones) is head's up with both A-gap responsibilities, and the field-side safety (either Hawkins or Neal, number ends in 2) rolled down to LB, weakside B-gap. One of the corners has to get more width.

This alignment makes sense against the run, but will get absolutely torched by a good passing game because a) it's easy to block and b) they've either committed to zone or giving the offense a mismatch with a slot against a safety.
 

dwmyers

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
522
  • Instead of focusing on the number of players with their hand down...
  • I like to just look at the number of DL between the outside shoulders of the OTs.
    • The 3-4 has 3 DL in that area.
    • The 4-3 has 2 DL in that area

In a Seattle hybrid front, the big end can be anywhere from the 6 to 5 to the 4i (the so called reduced front) , so strictly speaking, your comment about the "4-3" is incorrect.

The nuts and bolts of Seattle fronts are given in this Sports Illustrated article.

D-
 

CowboyRoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,924
Reaction score
38,930
The top value of Kazee and Neal to Quinn is that they are "his guys" and know his system.

Mike Nolan's biggest issue was that the players didn't buy into his scheme and he didn't have any ex-players to help with that issue.

NO.............the biggest issue with Nolan is that he had two weeks and no preseason to install his entire new defense. 2nd biggest issue was all the injuries. 3rd biggest issue was the defense lacked talent. 4th biggest issue was that he tried to make too many changes with no time to do it.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,351
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
In a Seattle hybrid front, the big end can be anywhere from the 6 to 5 to the 4i (the so called reduced front) , so strictly speaking, your comment about the "4-3" is incorrect.

The nuts and bolts of Seattle fronts are given in this Sports Illustrated article.

D-
No, my post is correct. You just misinterpreted it.

There is a reason that Quinn's defense has been described as 4-3 with 3-4 personnel.

My post is with regards to 3-4 vs 4-3 concepts, not actual defined naming conventions.
 

dwmyers

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
522
No, my post is correct. You just misinterpreted it.

There is a reason that Quinn's defense has been described as 4-3 with 3-4 personnel.

My post is with regards to 3-4 vs 4-3 concepts, not actual defined naming conventions.

Your post is conceptually wrong. There are 4-3 sets with three DL inside the 5, period, end of sentence.

But from these fronts, which look the same, they can run a pure 1 gap 4-3 and have, or they can also run with the 3-4 hybrid ideas.

Pete Carroll says so, here.

Such as this front, from the Sports Illustrated article you ignored. 4-3 inside, Seattle style, 3 linemen between the 5.

under-front.webp

There is the reduced front..

reduced-under-front.webp


There is the reduced over, which again has 3 linemen within the 5..

reduced-over-front-1.webp


and then there is the Bear front..

early-bear.webp
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
Your post is conceptually wrong. There are 4-3 sets with three DL inside the 5, period, end of sentence.

But from these fronts, which look the same, they can run a pure 1 gap 4-3 and have, or they can also run with the 3-4 hybrid ideas.

Pete Carroll says so, here.

Such as this front, from the Sports Illustrated article you ignored. 4-3 inside, Seattle style, 3 linemen between the 5.

under-front.webp

There is the reduced front..

reduced-under-front.webp


There is the reduced over, which again has 3 linemen within the 5..

reduced-over-front-1.webp


and then there is the Bear front..

early-bear.webp
A 4-3 under/over is the same as a 3-4 which is the same as a 5-2.

This is a pointless distinction, and terminology will vary from coach to coach.
 

dwmyers

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
522
A 4-3 under/over is the same as a 3-4 which is the same as a 5-2.

This is a pointless distinction, and terminology will vary from coach to coach.

The claim appears to be that 2 gap play exclusively happens when three linemen are between the outside shoulders of the offensive tackles. and otherwise it's pure 1 gap play.

And this is when the base of the base defense is identical to what Marinelli coached here for years, as Pete Carroll says definitively here.

D-
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
The claim appears to be that 2 gap play exclusively happens when three linemen are between the outside shoulders of the offensive tackles. and otherwise it's pure 1 gap play.

And this is when the base of the base defense is identical to what Marinelli coached here for years, as Pete Carroll says definitively here.

D-
I don't disagree with you necessarily.

I'm just saying that the distinction is irrelevant because both 3-4 and 4-3 coaches will use, effectively, the same alignments and call them different things.
 

xwalker

Well-Known Member
Messages
56,925
Reaction score
64,351
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Your post is conceptually wrong. There are 4-3 sets with three DL inside the 5, period, end of sentence.

But from these fronts, which look the same, they can run a pure 1 gap 4-3 and have, or they can also run with the 3-4 hybrid ideas.

Pete Carroll says so, here.

Such as this front, from the Sports Illustrated article you ignored. 4-3 inside, Seattle style, 3 linemen between the 5.

under-front.webp

There is the reduced front..

reduced-under-front.webp


There is the reduced over, which again has 3 linemen within the 5..

reduced-over-front-1.webp


and then there is the Bear front..

early-bear.webp
Wrong.
 
Top