The 3-4 Defense

Billy Bullocks

Active Member
Messages
4,098
Reaction score
22
The Reason our defense didn't make the jump into an elite defense last year was , IMO, not really FS, but rather the lack of a formidable pass rusher opposite of DeMarcus Ware. As has been stated in this thread many times over, the concept behind the 3-4 is to disguise where your 4th rusher is coming from. When you dont have another guy capable of getting to the QB besides Ware, this becomes hard.
 

Cowboys&Caps

New Member
Messages
1,701
Reaction score
0
The 3-4 is all about flexibility, teams like the Steelers, Patriots, Ravens of a few years ago, and now the cowboys are able to adapt to the blocking schemes they face on any given week better than the teams running a 4-3 the 3 down linemen when used right occupy 4 o-lineman and that leaves a tackle or a tackle and a tight end to deal with what ever pass rushers the scheme brings on that play, so it gives an advantage to the defense because you can bring people from the same side and overload.

That said it usually is a bit weaker against the run because you have less mass (extra MLB rather than a DT) unless you have very strong mature players, and it takes a year or so for the players to really understand it and really make it dominant.
 

PacoReloaded

New Member
Messages
366
Reaction score
0
peplaw06 said:
1) Element of surprise in blitzing. The offense doesn't know where the blitz is coming from. This didn't work too well for us last year, cause it was basically Ware blitzing every time. That's why we need a rush OLB opposite of him.
This is in large part because our DC is none other than Zimmer.
 

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
RiggoForever said:
I know Parcells is a big proponent of this defense, and Dallas used it most of the year with solid success last season.

Can anybody tell me the advantages/disadvantages of this defense versus the 4-3, and why most teams opt for the 4-3 rather then the 3-4?

The main advantage is that if you have the correct personnel, the offense has a hard time figuring out who's blitzing and who is dropping back in coverage.

Typically, the 3-4 consists of bigger front seven which usually gives way to better tackling and the defense not wearing down as easily. I also think it's easier to draft players in the 3-4 than the 4-3. The DE's can be found from college DT's and requires more strength than quickness and speed. Since there are so many undersized 4-3 DE's in college, they can be rather easily converted to OLB. The tough part in my mind is finding a SS that can blitz, stop the run, and play in coverage along with finding a huge NG to stop the run up the middle.

But the biggest reason why I've been a proponent of the 3-4 is it confuses QB's. I've heard from and talked to several former NFL QB's who tell me that nothing fools them more than the zone blitz and because the 3-4 is practically set up to be a zone blitzing defense, if you can find the right personnel and coaching....you can make for a helluva defense.


Rich.................
 

Rack

Federal Agent
Messages
23,906
Reaction score
3,106
That said it usually is a bit weaker against the run because you have less mass (extra MLB rather than a DT) unless you have very strong mature players, and it takes a year or so for the players to really understand it and really make it dominant


Sorry but this simply isn't true.


San Diego (a 3-4 team) finished first against the run.

Pittsburgh finished 3rd.

New England finished 8th.

That's almost half the 3-4 teams in the NFL finishing in the top 10 vs the run.

Pittsburgh is almost always in the top 5 vs the run.
 

MiStar

New Member
Messages
395
Reaction score
0
Crown Royal said:
Both can be good schemes if used correctly. The 3-4 is currently very trendy, and it has been successful with a good amount of lbers. Note that the 0 gap nose tackle is starting to become scarce as other teams go to the scheme.

About 5-6 years ago, the big thing in the NFL was the TB/Monte Kiffin/Tony Dungy cover 2 - a 4-3 form based on getting QB pressure with your 4 down lineman and playing a disciplined zone in your secondary. For a while, if you could just find some good lineman, you could play this scheme - but so many went to it that ends became harder to find (note - they will always be hard to find - a true 3point pass rusher is a very difficult commodity to find - very, very effective, but tough to find).

Basically - they are all schemes, and only as good as the personnell you can plug into. Neither one is really better than the other if it can't be run effectively. For instance - the Ravens have always had a good defense, and have gone back and forth over the last 5 years - they started (and won a SB) in a 4-3 scheme that was very successful, have for several years been a 3-4, and last year reverted back to a 4-3.

Also, outside of scheme, it is important to note that there are 2 general defensive mentalities - 1) beating an offense by masking what you area throwing at them and 2) physically being better and more disciplined.

An example of 1 - beating a team by masking your defense: This style is favored by defensive coaches such as Buddy Ryan (the 46 defense), Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams, etc. They show you many, many different fronts - the goal is to confuse the QB and the offense as to what you are doing. For instance - your line is spread wide, your linebackers are showing zone, and then, all of a sudden at the snap, you get a gap blitz attack from your weak and middle lber - the QB never saw it coming and takes you by surprise. Often times lower quality DBs excel in this scheme because the idea is to get pressure - see teams like Philadelphia, where Jim is the master of the blitz package.

Example 2 - the 'Beat you Straight Up' style coach. Coaches like this are Bill Parcells, Tony Dungy, Landry. Basically - these defenses don't try to do smoke and mirror - they try to plug talented, start defenders into the right place and make sure they know their assignments. You rarely see complex blitzes - maybe a safety blitz, a zone blitz, perhaps the MLB will hit the 2 gap. But the idea here is discipline - get pressure with your front 4 or 5 (depending on how many you rush), make sure everyone stays with their assignments, etc. If you have good players, this works really well without having to be too complex. Note that Parcells and Dungy is an example of this - I think that this is one of the reasons Zimmer is here - Zimmer used to be a big fan of the cover 2, which would fall under this category - you rarely blitz in that scheme and rely on QB pressure from your front 4. Parcells had a press conference last year discussing these two types of defensive mentality and expressed that he prefers this style. This kind of explains why you have never really seen a complex blitz package past a zone blitz in our defense.

Anyway - the point to all this is that there really is no 'right' way to do it - the key is good players and, perhaps even more importantly, good coaching that knows how to use these players.

nice post
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
This is just a phase for us. The 4-3 is the heart of the Cowboys.

We'll be back.

Regardless of scheme, it's the players who make it work. We had the #1 Defense 3 years ago using the 4-3 and fell to #20 a year later with the same scheme.

I've always preferred the 4-3 as it gives more bulk along the LOS to nitigate those 300 lb. OLmen.

Do you know why the 3-4 almost went the way of the dinasaur? Because those D's weren't able to stop the massive Cowboy OL of the early and mid nineties. There wasn't enough bulk along the DL to stop us, and we chewed up 3-4 D's like puppy with a biscuit.
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
MiStar said:
nice post

Acknowledgements are nice ... but is there really a reason to quote an entire 2 page write up to answer with NICE POST ???
 

superpunk

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,330
Reaction score
75
Eddie said:
Acknowledgements are nice ... but is there really a reason to quote an entire 2 page write up to answer with NICE POST ???

Mouse scroll buttons are a ***** to use, huh?
 

aznhalf

New Member
Messages
882
Reaction score
0
Eddie said:
This is just a phase for us. The 4-3 is the heart of the Cowboys.

We'll be back.

Regardless of scheme, it's the players who make it work. We had the #1 Defense 3 years ago using the 4-3 and fell to #20 a year later with the same scheme.

I've always preferred the 4-3 as it gives more bulk along the LOS to nitigate those 300 lb. OLmen.

Do you know why the 3-4 almost went the way of the dinasaur? Because those D's weren't able to stop the massive Cowboy OL of the early and mid nineties. There wasn't enough bulk along the DL to stop us, and we chewed up 3-4 D's like puppy with a biscuit.

Going off of that, maybe the shift towards smaller more athletic llinemen has caused the 3-4 to become popular.

*Shrugs* just a thought.
 

rexrobinson

Active Member
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
0
Eddie said:
Do you know why the 3-4 almost went the way of the dinasaur? Because those D's weren't able to stop the massive Cowboy OL of the early and mid nineties. There wasn't enough bulk along the DL to stop us, and we chewed up 3-4 D's like puppy with a biscuit.

They were the exception not the rule, and no one has been able to duplicate that since.

The reason 3-4s are coming back IMO is mainly because of Free Agency/Salary Cap and the tendancy to pass more these days.
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
aznhalf said:
Going off of that, maybe the shift towards smaller more athletic llinemen has caused the 3-4 to become popular.

*Shrugs* just a thought.


Very possible. I think as OL's became bigger and bigger, D's countered with bigger and bigger DL's.

That caused another shift ... smaller and more mobile OL's.

Thus, the counter is smaller and more mobile D's ... ala the 3-4.

Seems like the entire NFL is always in transgression ... always changing. One change leads to a counter, and so on and so forth.

Very interesting.
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
rexrobinson said:
They were the exception not the rule, and no one has been able to duplicate that since.

The reason 3-4s are coming back IMO is mainly because of Free Agency/Salary Cap and the tendancy to pass more these days.


FA and Salary Cap has nothing to do with defensive alignment.

The 3-4 is a reaction to recent changes by the Offense ...
 

rexrobinson

Active Member
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
0
Eddie said:
FA and Salary Cap has nothing to do with defensive alignment.

The 3-4 is a reaction to recent changes by the Offense ...

I disagree finding the right 4-3 DEs are harder than any other spot on defense, and keeping them on your team is harder.
 

peplaw06

That Guy
Messages
13,699
Reaction score
413
PacoReloaded said:
This is in large part because our DC is none other than Zimmer.

True, but remember.... He was learning the system too. It wasn't just Ware, Spears, Canty, etc. learning it, it was Zimmer too. I don't know if he can be the same DC who coached our number 1 defense in previous years with a 3-4, but he can only get better right? He's not going to be worse.

Basically all of our front 7 was learning the 34 last year, and they were in the middle of the pack defensively and held a pretty low scoring average. This year will be the key year to see if it's going to work for the foreseeable future. Everyone's been talking about the offense with TO and we have a kicker, that we'll be able to make a SB run if the defense playes well and we protect Bledsoe. I'm pretty excited about the 2nd year in the 3-4, and think we'll have a top 5-10 defense at least.
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
rexrobinson said:
I disagree finding the right 4-3 DEs are harder than any other spot on defense, and keeping them on your team is harder.


Understood. But every team faces the same challenges. DE's and pass rushers will always be the prime cornerstone of any championship team ... regardless of scheme.

A top pass rushing OLB in a 3-4 are just as hard to find as top pass rushing DE's in a 4-3 ... and just as difficult to re-sign. But every team faces the same challenge.

If the 3-4 were really that easy of a fix, then more than 6 teams would be employing it right now.

It's not really making a comeback, it's simply that the past few Super Bowl winners have employed it.

Unfortunately, the losing team used a 4-3 ... and in almost all cases for the past several Super Bowls, one play would have changed the game. If so, the 3-4 would be a dead animal right now.
 

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
A top pass rushing OLB in a 3-4 are just as hard to find as top pass rushing DE's in a 4-3

I really don't believe so. The college game is becoming increasingly reliant on speed and will sacrifice size to find speed on the field. Thus, you get a lot of guys like Joey Porter, DeMarcus Ware, and Mike Vrabel being very good 4-3 college DE's that just can't make the switch to the 4-3 DE position in the NFL because they are undersized. But, teams can now move them to a 3-4 OLB spot that suits them much better.

The same thing could be said about guys like Aaron Smith, Kimo Van Oehlhoffen, and Jay Ratliff who were pretty good college 4-3 DT's that really didn't have a place in the NFL in a 4-3 scheme. However, you move them to DE in the 3-4 and they do well.

To me, that's the big reason why the 3-4 is working well today. Ever since Jimmy Johnson's U. of Miami teams came in and dominated on defense with smaller, but much faster defensive players, other college teams have followed suit. Good, undersized college DE's used to have very little room in the NFL, but once teams like Pittsburgh recognized how to use these players in their scheme, they really increased their crop of defensive players to choose from come draft time.


Rich...........
 

Skeptic

New Member
Messages
851
Reaction score
0
Eskimo said:
I decided to look up the sack leaders from the last season on NFL.com.

The breakdown is as follows:

6 LBs and only one in the top 10 (Jason Taylor). The other LBs were Merriman, Ware, Porter, Haggans and Suggs (? was he playing DE last year). Now amonst these Taylor and Suggs are pretty darn close to being DEs.

3 DTs

20 DEs

1 DB (Adrian Wilson of the Cards had 8 sacks last year)

Now a lot of the DEs on the list were of the tweener variety but not many of them are what you would consider true LBs.

Just some food for thought.

Jason Taylor plays DE. They probably labeled him as a LB accidentally.

http://www.miamidolphins.com/lockerroom/teamroster/teamroster.asp
 

Eddie

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,092
Reaction score
5,862
Yakuza Rich said:
Good, undersized college DE's used to have very little room in the NFL, but once teams like Pittsburgh recognized how to use these players in their scheme, they really increased their crop of defensive players to choose from come draft time.


Pittsburgh has definitely done a good job of rebuilding and reloading their D year after year ... probably for those very same reasons you mentioned.

But the 3-4 is still a minority Defense. Employed by only 6 teams ... 5 of which are related to Bill Belachek/Parcells.

If we go back in time ... if the refs got the call right on the Tuck rule, and a few balls bounced a different way over the past few years, I think only the Pats, Cowboys, and Steelers would be using this Defense.

Maybe not even the Pats ... without those last second Super Bowls, Belichek may not have a job right now.
 
Top