3-4 Needs to Be 86'd

[Yakuza Rich]

If we're not going to play an agressive 3-4 then we need to scrap it! I'm just watching the game again and seeing Ellis and Ware screaming off the ends just makes one picture the possibilities if we went back to the 4 man line every down. Couldn't we move Spears inside with Fergi and rotate the other guys. Brady in the middle with Adoyele and Burnett or Carpenter outside. I think Adoyele would be more effective outside anyways. Maybe with a new coach next year, the 3-4 is scratched, despite what Jerry says.

Problem is that we could go to a 4-3 and still be conservative with it.

I think they need to send 5 pass rushers (Ellis+Ware, along with 3 D-Lineman) much more often than they do. They sent 7 pass rushers quite a bit against the G-Men, but since they don't disguise it very well, the G-Men could beat the blitz.


YAKUZA

 

[YosemiteSam]

Problem is that we could go to a 4-3 and still be conservative with it.

I think they need to send 5 pass rushers (Ellis+Ware, along with 3 D-Lineman) much more often than they do. They sent 7 pass rushers quite a bit against the G-Men, but since they don't disguise it very well, the G-Men could beat the blitz.


YAKUZA

I like delayed rushes. Say rush Ellis with the line and 1.5 seconds later have Ware stunt inside. That seems to eat the Cowboys lunch....

 

[Juke99]

Why are we worried so much about blitz packages?

How about beating a team man to man? Regardless of our DC, Canty and Spears have not lived up to the hype this year. We can only do so much when 2 of the 3 down linemen are ineffective.

On the nosey!

 

[Stautner]

If we're not going to play an agressive 3-4 then we need to scrap it! I'm just watching the game again and seeing Ellis and Ware screaming off the ends just makes one picture the possibilities if we went back to the 4 man line every down. Couldn't we move Spears inside with Fergi and rotate the other guys. Brady in the middle with Adoyele and Burnett or Carpenter outside. I think Adoyele would be more effective outside anyways. Maybe with a new coach next year, the 3-4 is scratched, despite what Jerry says.

It's funny that just a few weeks ago I started a thread that suggested that we would be in a lot better shape if we had stayed in the 4-3, the reason being that we wouldn't have had to use so many draft picks and FA acquisitions to make dramatic changes in personnel, and we would have had more resources (draft picks/FA money) available to upgrade other areas.

The funny part is that the overwhelming majority of posters disagreed and ranted about how happy they were with our 3-4 defense.

 

[YosemiteSam]

The funny part is that the overwhelming majority of posters disagreed and ranted about how happy they were with our 3-4 defense.

Without question, the 3-4 is the best choice. On top of that, Canty and Spears arn't getting pressure one-on-one in a 3-4 setup, what makes anyone think they would get pressure one-on-one in a 4-3 which they are not suited for?

:eyepoke:

 

[Stautner]

Without question, the 3-4 is the best choice. On top of that, Canty and Spears arn't getting pressure one-on-one in a 3-4 setup, what makes anyone think they would get pressure one-on-one in a 4-3 which they are not suited for?

:eyepoke:

Canty and Spears could move inside with Ellis and Ware at DE.

Besides, your personnel comments are after the fact. Had we never gone to the 3-4 to begin with we would have made different personnel choices.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I agree with Stautner. I was fine with the 34 because it's what Bill needed to make him happy, but really, if we'd just added to the 43 pieces we had, we'd probably be ahead of where we are right now.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Canty and Spears could move inside with Ellis and Ware at DE.

Besides, your personnel comments are after the fact. Had we never gone to the 3-4 to begin with we would have made different personnel choices.

Does that mean Canty and Spears would get pressure one-on-one? No. I will answer Chocolate Lab which will answer your "personnel choices" part.

I agree with Stautner. I was fine with the 34 because it's what Bill needed to make him happy, but really, if we'd just added to the 43 pieces we had, we'd probably be ahead of where we are right now.

The problem is that dominate 4-3 DE type players are becoming harder and harder to come by. It's much easier to land 300lbs 3-4 DEs with a 260lbs LBers than it is to move the 3-4s to tackles and get 280lbs DEs that have the quickness of 260lbs LBers. (ala Greg Ellis) In a 4-3 defense your LBers size generally drops to 240lbs making them faster, but less able to handle offensive linemen blocks. Of course with 4 down linemen, your LBers won't face as many offensive linemen and more tightends/fullbacks.

 

[ravidubey]

The 3-4 has won the last 4 Superbowls. Its been statistically proven time and time again the teams that blitz the most tend to lose the most.

Coincidence having less to do with the scheme than with the coaches behind the scheme and the talent running it. The Steelers and Patriots had/have two veteran coaching staffs with great continuity. They are excellent at recognizing and drafting 3-4 talent and coaching the 3-4. This is 2 teams out of 32! There isn't that much 3-4 talent to go around.

In a 4-3 you must find two talented DE's; in the 3-4 you must find the right mix of several players and coaches and they must all communicate well and execute at a high level. They must do this to make up for losing size in the front seven.

Even then:

- New England cheated to defeat St Louis with the grabbing and shoving the referees were allowing. The 3-4 scheme was not a factor

- When New England beat Philadelphia, they actually moved to a 4-3 for much of the game to better deal with the Eagles OL.

- The Pats allowed 29 points against Carolina.

- Pittsburgh has had Troy Palomalu playing at a high level. With him playing that way it's almost like having 12 players on defense. In a 4-3 of equivalent talent he'd be even better.

- The best defense in recent memory was clearly the Ravens, and they were/are a 4-3. They switched briefly to a 3-4, then switched back realizing their error.

- Gibbs in New Orleans is successful because they have 1st round talent at DE and they are finally all healthy. The rest has fallen into place without any complexity scheming.

 

[Stautner]

Does that mean Canty and Spears would get pressure one-on-one? No. I will answer Chocolate Lab which will answer your "personnel choices" part.

Had we not switched to 3-4 we would have kept Glover - we already had a DT that could get pressure. Canty and/or Spears could have complimented that.

And we already had a decent pass rushing DE (Ellis) - Ware on the other side would have complimented that.

Not to mention, as I said before, had we stayed in a 4-3 we may have acquired other or different players that would have been even more suited for the 4-3 than Ware, Spears and Canty.

You can't keep arguing that staying with the 4-3 wouldn't have worked because Spears and Canty aren't great fits - those guys very possibly would never even have been considered if we had stayed in the 4-3.

The problem is that dominate 4-3 DE type players are becoming harder and harder to come by. It's much easier to land 300lbs 3-4 DEs with a 260lbs LBers than it is to move the 3-4s to tackles and get 280lbs DEs that have the quickness of 260lbs LBers. (ala Greg Ellis) In a 4-3 defense your LBers size generally drops to 240lbs making them faster, but less able to handle offensive linemen blocks. Of course with 4 down linemen, your LBers won't face as many offensive linemen and more tightends/fullbacks.

How many dominant dominant 300 pound 3-4 DE's can you name?

Those fast 260+ pound 3-4 OLB's can play DE in 4-3, and you can still have big LB's in the 4-3. Nothing about playing 4-3 requires small LB's - they just have to be fast. In addition, those 300 pound 3-4 DE's can play DT in a 4-3, and can get more QB pressure up the middle than a widebodied 320 NT.'

Face it, many parts are interchangeable between 4-3 and 3-4 depending on variations in the positioning, and both defenses have strengths. The 3-4 is not a clearly better defense, otherwise the majority of teams in the NFL wouldn't still be using the 4-3.

 

[ravidubey]

The problem is that dominate 4-3 DE type players are becoming harder and harder to come by. It's much easier to land 300lbs 3-4 DEs with a 260lbs LBers than it is to move the 3-4s to tackles and get 280lbs DEs that have the quickness of 260lbs LBers. (ala Greg Ellis) In a 4-3 defense your LBers size generally drops to 240lbs making them faster, but less able to handle offensive linemen blocks. Of course with 4 down linemen, your LBers won't face as many offensive linemen and more tightends/fullbacks.

I disagree. I used to buy this argument, but I now see that instead of two excellent players you must now find seven very good and smart players and coaches well-versed in coordinating their efforts.

Overall, this is tougher than finding two good DEs.

Philly, Seattle, Chicago, New Orleans, Carolina, Minnesota, and New York all have superior DE's and run excellent 4-3 defenses-- and I just mentioned the NFC's playoff contenders.

New England and Pittsburgh run quality 3-4 defenses and have engineered their organizations from top to bottom to be dedicated to maintaining those defenses with 3-4 talent and coaches. Had they not lucked into Brady and Rothlisburger, you'd be looking at two average teams with very good 3-4 defenses. Their QB's allow them to dedicate the resources they do to the defense.

Hence, there are no other quality 3-4 defenses. San Diego has a steroid case behind their success. Miami, San Franscisco, NY, Cleveland, and Dallas are going through a long multi-year process of trying to become New England and Pittsburgh, but they're treading water.

The 4-3 is where it's at on the defensive side, unless you have a franchise QB.

 

[Galian Beast]

Fact is its easier to find good linebackers than it is to find good linemen.

How many defensive ends did we waste #1 picks on?

 

[Stautner]

Fact is its easier to find good linebackers than it is to find good linemen.

How many defensive ends did we waste #1 picks on?

I'll grant you that argument - we did waste a number of #1 picks on DE's - although all of them were late in the 1st round.

STILL, look at the stastics for pass rushers. I'm not going to take the time to research it again, but when I posted the topic about whether we would have been better off sticking with the 4-3 I ended up looking up sack statistics and found that something like 20 of the top 25 sack leaders were 4-3 DE's, one or two were DT's, and around 3 or 4 were 3-4 OLB's.

Of course part of that overwhelming difference is that more teams play 4-3 than play 3-4, but the fact remains that the vast majority of NFL teams are having their pass rush success out of the 4-3 with those DE's that you claim are so hard to find.

 

[Future]

Why are we worried so much about blitz packages?

How about beating a team man to man? Regardless of our DC, Canty and Spears have not lived up to the hype this year. We can only do so much when 2 of the 3 down linemen are ineffective.

They anchored a defense that has been #1 in the league against the run...thats what 3-4 DEs and DTs are supposed to do. Spears rarely rushes the passer, Canty does only a little bit more. They are doing their job, its not glamorous but it is getting done.