Kiffin versus Zimmer 4-3 - please explain

[LarryCanadian]

Someone posted about the difference between our current 4-3 defense and how it is designed to stop the run versus being a true "bend, don't break defense".

Zimmer has done fairly well, at least statistically with defenses, we can't argue with that.

That being said, I certainly admit to being a "GROZ" back in the day, because of what seemed be a "Break at worst time after Bending a lot" type defense. Zimmer just couldn't get the pass rush pressure at the key time to close games or make the big play which seemed to cost us a lot of close games back in the day, and I was excited about an aggressive Parcells 3-4 (which never seemed to be very aggressive or blitzing actually).

So, in terms of 4-3 defenses, can you more technical experts explain how a Zimmer D would differ from a Kiffen D?

I'm liking the D shaping up right now, but I am still not sure if it fits our CB's (Carr is a smack them at the line and play the WR close type player - and Claiborne is missing a lot of time getting ready - plus our safeties are iffy in terms of being instinctive/ball hawking yet).

That being said, the "Bend don't Break" style can be VERY frustrating to Cowboys fans - when it "breaks" at the wrong time OR doesn't provide the turnovers that Kiffen's D is intended to produce!

What is the main difference in style?

Thanks,

LarryCanadian

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Let me preface my remarks by saying I'm no expert. Hopefully, someone more knowledgeable than I will come along and correct my mistakes.

As I recall, Zimmer's 4-3 relies heavily on blitzing and man coverage in the secondary. The Tampa 2, or Kiffin's 4-3, utilizes more zone coverage, and tends to rely on four man rushes to generate pressure rather than complex blitz designs.

Parcells ran a very passive version of the 3-4. It was rare he brought more than four rushers. He was also fond of the 2 deep zone for which Kiffin's defense is named.

 

[Wezsh0T]

Kiffen's Tampa 2 seems to tell Dlinemen to just rush up the field to get the QB. Didn't they call them "rushmen" in some article? I seem to recall Zimmer's was more read and react.

 

[cml750]

Kiffen's Tampa 2 seems to tell Dlinemen to just rush up the field to get the QB. Didn't they call them "rushmen" in some article? I seem to recall Zimmer's was more read and react.

You are correct. Kiffen or probably more correctly Rod Marinelli teaches them to play the run while going for the QB.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Zimmer's defense in Dallas were often frustrating because his blitzes were seldom effective against halfway decent offensive lines...or that was my perception anyway. His blitzes didn't seem to be well executed or well designed. It felt like he would stack the line of scrimmage 20 seconds before the ball was snapped, tipping his hand and giving the offense more than enough time to adjust.

I admit to being on the GROZ train as it was passing through Dallas. However, Zimmer has since developed into a very good defensive coordinator over the past several seasons, and we should remember that when we become so loud in our criticism of Garrett and so adamant in our claim that he should be fired. A little patience can pay huge dividends. I bet Cleveland wishes they'd stuck with Belichick a little bit longer.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Kiffen's Tampa 2 seems to tell Dlinemen to just rush up the field to get the QB. Didn't they call them "rushmen" in some article? I seem to recall Zimmer's was more read and react.

Both Kiffin and Zimmer use one gap schemes. Kiffin calls it "reading on the run".

 

[viman96]

What does GROZ mean?

 

[LarryCanadian]

Appreciate the info. Will be interesting to see how it all develops. Weird to see Newman and PacMan as corners in Cinci - not that I want either at this stage.....

 

[ScipioCowboy]

What does GROZ mean?

Get Rid of Zimmer.

 

[LarryCanadian]

Sorry, "GROZ" stood for posters that wanted to "Get Rid of Zimmer" after frustration with the defense mainly not being able to come up with a big play or not breaking at the last minute.....
Quite a few posters (myself admittedly one of them) wanted a change, despite Zimmer's D being highly ranked in terms of points allowed (2nd one season I believe).
I still think it "breaks" at the wrong time though - Cinci's D hasn't exactly carried the team deep into playoffs either, but you can't argue that statistically at end of season Zim's D's tend to show well at the very least...

 

[StonetheCrow77]

It certainly helps Zimmer, that he has some talent to play with, now. His secondary is still subpar... but, a DL like that will help many things.

 

[Wezsh0T]

Zimmer's defense in Dallas were often frustrating because his blitzes were seldom effective against halfway decent offensive lines...or that was my perception anyway. His blitzes didn't seem to be well executed or well designed. It felt like he would stack the line of scrimmage 20 seconds before the ball was snapped, tipping his hand and giving the offense more than enough time to adjust.

I admit to being on the GROZ train as it was passing through Dallas. However, Zimmer has since developed into a very good defensive coordinator over the past several seasons, and we should remember that when we become so loud in our criticism and so adamant in our claim that he should be fired. A little patience can pay huge dividends. I bet Cleveland wishes they'd stuck with Belichick a little bit longer.

We used to refer to the Zimmer blitzes as Keystone Cops blitzing. All the Cowboy defenders would run into each other on their way to the qb.

 

[dwmyers]

So, in terms of 4-3 defenses, can you more technical experts explain how a Zimmer D would differ from a Kiffen D?

To a first approximation, it shouldn't, since Zimmer modeled his defenses after the ones Tampa Bay was playing when Kiffen was coaching there.

Now whether he calls the same game as Kiffen would is an entirely different issue.

D-

 

[LarryCanadian]

Ok, thanks. Just wondered. IF we can get turnovers and create better pressure then it will be an improvement. We did have "keystone cops" blitzing at that time, and I'm not sure if it was coaching, scheme, or just talent, - probably a combo.....

Those 80 yard drives at key times kill you in the bend/don't break schemes, and historically the forums hate it! There was fan pressure for a change, and then we got Parcell's very unaggressive 3-4 (wrong expectations from non-technical fans like myself I think).

The 3-4 couldn't come up with key stops either though....

 

[noshame]

Here's the scientific explanation of all defenses: If your guys are better than their guys, your defense(4-3,3-4) is the best

Seriously, play callers on both sides of the ball are highly under-rated in the success or failure of both offenses and defenses. As is using personnel to their best ability. Norv is one of the better play callers on offense, you never know what is coming. While JG was OK, he clearly showed tendencies at times, many times.

Believe it of not Campo was a good defensive play caller, as is Monty and Zimmer also.

I suspect we'll all be in for as huge surprise opening night, on both sides of the ball. I almost pity the Giants...Nawwwwwww!

 

[viman96]

Get Rid of Zimmer.

Sorry, "GROZ" stood for posters that wanted to "Get Rid of Zimmer" after frustration with the defense mainly not being able to come up with a big play or not breaking at the last minute.....

Thanks. I remember the Zimmer days and it was not good. I do not recall folks using that to describe him. LOL I still do not know was BSPN specifically stands for and I have been on this forum for a long time.

 

[dwmyers]

Ok, thanks. Just wondered. IF we can get turnovers and create better pressure then it will be an improvement. We did have "keystone cops" blitzing at that time, and I'm not sure if it was coaching, scheme, or just talent, - probably a combo.....

Those 80 yard drives at key times kill you in the bend/don't break schemes, and historically the forums hate it! There was fan pressure for a change, and then we got Parcell's very unaggressive 3-4 (wrong expectations from non-technical fans like myself I think).

The 3-4 couldn't come up with key stops either though....

Schemes really weren't the issues then. Linemen were. We went for a long time without anyone powerful enough to hold up at the point of attack and also rush passers. The years when Mike Myers was a starter here were painful. It didn't help that Jerry Jones and company tended to be "outside in" drafters and have a habit of ignoring interior linemen (OL and DL).

Zimmer couldn't be soundly aggressive because we lacked power and size on the line. And that we were talent crippled was in part due to the Joey Galloway trade (again, our staff favoring "outside" to "inside").

This team didn't get back to being healthy on the defensive line until the 2005 draft. We weren't sound on the offensive line until we picked up Leonard Davis via free agency. That our OL is our issue now should not come as a surprise to anyone who pays any attention to Dallas draft history.

If I can grant Parcells one thing, it's that he got us back to drafting more in terms of functional needs than like a bunch of WR crazed fanboys.

D-

 

[LarryCanadian]

I agree, we overpaid for Galloway and Roy Williams (more so Williams, Galloway got hurt and had a decent career to that point and even did alright after...). I STILL feel this organization ignores the trenches too much in terms of drafting - that is where the game is opened up for the skill guys to shine!

Can't remember if these players were around during the Zim years, but If they didn't hit so well on Glover as a free agent at DT, the middle of our D would have been REALLY ugly. Nguyen and Coakley were pretty solid bailing out the front at times, and Ellis was solid for years (although after his first couple of years you always wondered if he had even more in him.....).

Parcells was so right when he said there are very few 300 pound + athletic football guys, and they are the hardest ones to find/replace....

 

[JerryFan]

Someone posted about the difference between our current 4-3 defense and how it is designed to stop the run versus being a true "bend, don't break defense".

Zimmer has done fairly well, at least statistically with defenses, we can't argue with that.

That being said, I certainly admit to being a "GROZ" back in the day, because of what seemed be a "Break at worst time after Bending a lot" type defense. Zimmer just couldn't get the pass rush pressure at the key time to close games or make the big play which seemed to cost us a lot of close games back in the day, and I was excited about an aggressive Parcells 3-4 (which never seemed to be very aggressive or blitzing actually).

So, in terms of 4-3 defenses, can you more technical experts explain how a Zimmer D would differ from a Kiffen D?

I'm liking the D shaping up right now, but I am still not sure if it fits our CB's (Carr is a smack them at the line and play the WR close type player - and Claiborne is missing a lot of time getting ready - plus our safeties are iffy in terms of being instinctive/ball hawking yet).

That being said, the "Bend don't Break" style can be VERY frustrating to Cowboys fans - when it "breaks" at the wrong time OR doesn't provide the turnovers that Kiffen's D is intended to produce!

What is the main difference in style?

Thanks,

LarryCanadian

There was a really good article on BTB on this a couple weeks ago or so. I think the jist was we are a penitrating (dline) flowing (linebackers) zone (dbs) defense. You'd have to read the article but its a great explanation of how to look at defenses.

 

[Wolfpack]

Zimmer ran several versions of the 4-3 and learned the Tampa 2 in his last few years with Dallas Pre-Tuna. I dont recall what the Defense was pre-Tampa 2 but it should have been some sort of Miami 43 which was the model for the Tampa 2. So...scheme wise there shouldnt be too much difference. Thats why the Kiffin hire is kinda ironic as it invalidates all those 3-4 years of drafting to some degree. But thats another story.

Zimmer's blitzes were horrid here..something was wrong somewhere in the playcalling chain of command.