Getting acclimated to watching the 3-4

[Juke99]

For long time Cowboy fans, this will take a bit of time...or at least for this long time Cowboy fan it will.

There are times when I'm watching and it makes me nutz to see Ware 15-20 yards downfield on a pass play.

One of the reasons the 3-4 became less prevalent is because offenses learned how to beat it...one of the ways to do so was to put an extra reciever on the line.

From Sam Wyche: "If you spread the 3-4 out and you leave yourself with one back, you usually reduce the front. So instead of having seven men in the box, if you've gota back that's lined up wide, usually somebody a LB or someone is going to walk out there.

You have one fewer blocker, but you have one fewer guy to block. So the strategy is: My guy may not block him every time but I know it's the equivalent of blocking him if (the linebacker) is standing out there where he can't make the tackle"

...or if the linebacker is 15 yards downfield covering a receiver.

On the other hand, the LB may instead rush the QB and make a big play.

There's the difference in what I've watched for 40 years from this team.

From the Landry years right through Zimmer, there wasn't a whole lot of gambling going on. Our defenses were great because we consistently stopped teams on the majority of drives. And our best pass rusher was always doing just that, rushing the passer. On rare occasion we'd drop a lineman into coverage and run a zone blitz, but those truly were rare occasions.

The 3-4 on the other hand isn't quite going to work the same way...or to my inexperienced eyes, it isn't. Drives will be stopped by someone making a big play, causing a turnover, etc. And the fact that Ware is in coverage sometimes, only makes it more confusing for the offense to know when he's going to be rushing the QB, which in turn, causes the big play.

Or something like that.

 

[Cbz40]

Excellent post Juke.......My concern with the 3/4 is stopping the run. We seem to be holding our own in that department thus far.

I like this D because it does allow us to get our best players on the field.

and yes, this long time fan is still adjusting to where, what, & who to watch on D.

 

[Sarge]

Excellent post Juke.......My concern with the 3/4 is stopping the run. We seem to be holding our own in that department thus far.

I like this D because it does allow us to get our best players on the field.

and yes, this long time fan is still adjusting to where, what, & who to watch on D.

It is a nice post Juke. I'm accepting this 3-4 thing but as an oldtimer like you two (well, not as old as Pops - but who is?) it's hard looking at the Cowboys in this formation.

Whatever works best though is what I want to use, obviously. There is going to be a learning curve, both for the players and us 'older' guys who are use to watching the Harvey Martins, Charles Haleys come tearing around the end out the 4-3.

Times change, they just better be for the better or some bugels will be flying.

 

[JDSmith]

I personally don't notice it all that much, probably because I have always lived in NJ and my father is a Giants fan. As a result, in the pre NFL Sunday Ticket days of my youth I watched a lot of Giants football and saw them running this scheme with great success.

 

[TheDuke]

the thing i love about this defense is seeing ware standing up ready to rush the passer. it just looks intimidating to me!

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Juke, I know it's a rough transition..it's really so much predicated on the versatility, lateral moves and speed of the outside backers..you just can't make it work w/o talented ones.

But there is one very important dynamic here that imo will ease the transition.

And that is the presence of #31. We don't really think of a a saftey making or breaking a 3-4.

But I have a feeling this one that's just a biscuit short of a linebacker is going to not just make stoping the run easier, but the coverage skills we decried at FS will look much different bailing out an OLB who overran his man.

Tuna has never had an SS talent like Roy on the field when playing his 3-4, closest he came to it was Milloy. Roy's ability to hone in on a ball carrier transcends scheme...he is going to make that middle of the field HIS, and patrol the parameters like a doberman...can't wait til the game is telecast tonight to see what he did, and who if anyone he was bailing out when he did it.

I swear from the limited No Huddle coverage last night, they were hearing #31's footsteps. And dropping passes underneath accordingly.

 

[JDSmith]

the thing i love about this defense is seeing ware standing up ready to rush the passer. it just looks intimidating to me!

And he gets a MUCH better jump on the ball when he starts standing.

 

[Hostile]

For long time Cowboy fans, this will take a bit of time...or at least for this long time Cowboy fan it will.

There are times when I'm watching and it makes me nutz to see Ware 15-20 yards downfield on a pass play.

One of the reasons the 3-4 became less prevalent is because offenses learned how to beat it...one of the ways to do so was to put an extra reciever on the line.

From Sam Wyche: "If you spread the 3-4 out and you leave yourself with one back, you usually reduce the front. So instead of having seven men in the box, if you've gota back that's lined up wide, usually somebody a LB or someone is going to walk out there.

You have one fewer blocker, but you have one fewer guy to block. So the strategy is: My guy may not block him every time but I know it's the equivalent of blocking him if (the linebacker) is standing out there where he can't make the tackle"

...or if the linebacker is 15 yards downfield covering a receiver.

On the other hand, the LB may instead rush the QB and make a big play.

There's the difference in what I've watched for 40 years from this team.

From the Landry years right through Zimmer, there wasn't a whole lot of gambling going on. Our defenses were great because we consistently stopped teams on the majority of drives. And our best pass rusher was always doing just that, rushing the passer. On rare occasion we'd drop a lineman into coverage and run a zone blitz, but those truly were rare occasions.

The 3-4 on the other hand isn't quite going to work the same way...or to my inexperienced eyes, it isn't. Drives will be stopped by someone making a big play, causing a turnover, etc. And the fact that Ware is in coverage sometimes, only makes it more confusing for the offense to know when he's going to be rushing the QB, which in turn, causes the big play.

Or something like that.

The big test of our 3-4 will be when it is facing a team with a big OL and a RB who can beat you. I like the last 2 games and what I have seen. Pressure on the QB, turnovers, and in all 3 games not many points allowed. We acquired some good talent this off season. This defense might be very special if all the pieces begin to fit right. Doesn't matter which scheme you run, the better the chemistry, the better the results. So far we look pretty good. This is without Spears and Ferguson too. Better days might still be ahead. Isn't that a fun thought?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

The five biggest positive differences to this defense over a year ago...
1. The signing of Henry.
2. The drafting of Ware.
3. The improvement of Newman.
4. The improved play at FS.
5. The ability of Roy to play his more natural position.

And none of those things have anything to do with the 3-4.

 

[Sarge]

The five biggest positive differences to this defense over a year ago...
1. The signing of Henry.
2. The drafting of Ware.
3. The improvement of Newman.
4. The improved play at FS.
5. The ability of Roy to play his more natural position.

And none of those things have anything to do with the 3-4.

...but all 5 are truly HUGE.

Nice post.

 

[Nors]

4-3 apologist Mikey?

We drafted and signed 3-4 parts. Its all scheme and CONFUSING an offense. One play Burnett and Ware are in coverage. Next playing rushing off the edge and creating sacks and fumbles.

Bigger football players on the field.
Not only is the 3-4 here - its doing GREAT so far.

Any yes - LTN - i observed the same - Roy much more suited for the 3-4 and SS role in it. Its almost a 3-5....

 

[scottsp]

4-3 apologist Mikey?

We drafted and signed 3-4 parts. Its all scheme and CONFUSING an offense. One play Burnett and Ware are in coverage. Next playing rushing off the edge and creating sacks and fumbles.

Bigger football players on the field.
Not only is the 3-4 here - its doing GREAT so far.

Any yes - LTN - i observed the same - Roy much more suited for the 3-4 and SS role in it. Its almost a 3-5....

Another day in the life of...

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Another day in the life of...

That's OK.

I enjoy having the Nor-monster around.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

The five biggest positive differences to this defense over a year ago...
1. The signing of Henry.
2. The drafting of Ware.
3. The improvement of Newman.
4. The improved play at FS.
5. The ability of Roy to play his more natural position.

And none of those things have anything to do with the 3-4.

No, but they are the things done to try to ensure the 3-4 works.

The logical mind step is they would have ensured the 4-3 too, tho the critical line pass rush still would not have been addressed with any of the moves, the secondary would not have been as exposed.

What the 3-4 gives us is versatility to rush the passer from more angles, and in the absence of a great pass rushing 4-3 end, it's not just make-do but maybe even preferable.

You hang your rush on a Kearse or an Abraham and keep your fingers crossed.

You hang it on several players playing front or back, and disguise with even more blitzes, the odds start to favor you.

Mike, even the 4-3 dline talent of the Jets (cripe, Abe, Ellis, Robertson, Fergy kicked it up a VERY big notch by mixing in the 3-4 last year). Not to mention the ability to rest those linemen so that in the 4th qtr, they aren't dog tired.

One of the big reasons NY was so effective in second half shut outs last season was Henderson's adjustments.

But a rested dline rotation was pretty big too.

More and more it's about depth and role playing and versatility, and who has managed to catch his second wind. I mean, look at New England...they way they can utilize the roster, how guys spell one another, how they always make you feel you are playing a full roster, no wasted spots.

I think that's what the 3-4 will give us... a Coleman all of a sudden a 'force', a Burnette subbing for a Singleton....players in, players out, and in different formations, causing mental confusion. You rotate with 4-3 presonnel, but this just ups the ante. Exponentially.

It's 21st century ball, Mikey.

Not quite yer old 3-4.

 

[Hostile]

The five biggest positive differences to this defense over a year ago...
1. The signing of Henry.
2. The drafting of Ware.
3. The improvement of Newman.
4. The improved play at FS.
5. The ability of Roy to play his more natural position.

And none of those things have anything to do with the 3-4.

I will echo that, but remind that this is still pre season and not full games by the starting D. I will also balance that by saying some of our best players aren't in yet.

The scheme is making a difference but it is making the difference because of the players we acquired. It was and is always about the personnel. The best players make your team better and better teams win.

It isn't rocket science. We'd be playing this well regardless of scheme because we acquired some real talent to go along with 5 already very good to great defenders in Ellis, Nguyen, Williams, Newman, and Glover.

Very encouraging.

 

[dwmyers]

From the Landry years right through Zimmer, there wasn't a whole lot of gambling going on.

While this might be true for the Landry years, this hasn't been true since Chad Hennings retired. In fact, since we last had a decent DL, we have had to blitz and generally resort to unsound defense to get any kind of pass rush at all.

David.

 

[Nors]

We are far better in the 3-4

Bigger players on the field and players that move around and put PRESSURE on an offense. That will result in mistakes and turnovers......Its already showing!

 

[Juke99]

...just to clarify...I'm not suggesting one defense is better than another...not suggesting why this one might outperform what we've seen in the past season...

I'm only saying it's simply different to watch...and after years of conditioning, it takes a bit of adjustment. I've always watched the defensive side of the ball more closely and in the past, it was at times, pretty easy to see how a play was developing. Plus, when I watched, I'd see the entire defense in unison...now, I find myself more focused on the play of the LB's...

In any case, the best defense I've ever seen was the 1970 team which gave up 2 offensive TD's in their last 7 games...and 41 total points (only 34 surrendered by the defense) over the same period. Just to give ya an idea of how that would stack up today...this would be the equivalent of a team giving up 96 points in a 16 game schedule.

Ultimately, it was all about the players.

 

[dwmyers]

The five biggest positive differences to this defense over a year ago...
1. The signing of Henry.
2. The drafting of Ware.
3. The improvement of Newman.
4. The improved play at FS.
5. The ability of Roy to play his more natural position.

And none of those things have anything to do with the 3-4.

Yea, but with the personnel we drafted, if we lined up Ware, Ellis, Glover and Coleman in a 4-3 front and let Ware get beat up by a LT, then we squander Ware's speed. These players were drafted with a 3-4 in mind so that Ware is most often chipped by a guard, dinged by a fullback or H back and generally matches his exceptional speed against a lesser blocker.

In a 3-4 we have Ellis on the LT and Ellis is good enough to occupy the LT; then Ware comes in and Mistah Jets for Legs causes backfield havoc.

My guess is, though, as Spears and Ferguson come off injured lists, we'll actually see more of the 4-3.

David.

 

[Hostile]

...just to clarify...I'm not suggesting one defense is better than another...not suggesting why this one might outperform what we've seen in the past season...

I'm only saying it's simply different to watch...and after years of conditioning, it takes a bit of adjustment. I've always watched the defensive side of the ball more closely and in the past, it was at times, pretty easy to see how a play was developing. Plus, when I watched, I'd see the entire defense in unison...now, I find myself more focused on the play of the LB's...

In any case, the best defense I've ever seen was the 1970 team which gave up 2 offensive TD's in their last 7 games...and 41 total points (only 34 surrendered by the defense) over the same period. Just to give ya an idea of how that would stack up today...this would be the equivalent of a team giving up 96 points in a 16 game schedule.

Ultimately, it was all about the players.

Agreed only a handful of people on this site claim this and they refuse to see anything other than their own opinions as valid. It's a good scheme but the players make the difference. You are correct to focus on the LBs for action.