The 3-4...

[Juke99]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

 

[Dawgs0916]

Wow, right on frickin target man...so true.

 

[Maikeru-sama]

Juke, I think the problem is that Zimmer is still trying to learn all the nuances of the 3-4 Scheme.

His style of attack is very predictable.

They dont seem to be teaching Ware for one to disguise his Blitzing, as you can always tell he is going to blitz?

I think there are way too many blitzes up the middle?

I hate to say this about a relative (though I have not met him), but Keith Davis' in-experience is probably hurting us way more than we know. I think Zimmer is so scared of Davis' lack of skill that he doesnt take risks.

Where are the corner blitzes at? We have a very good secondary, why not bring Newman on Nickel Blitzes every now and then?

Why on earth are we not blitzing Roy Williams as much when we go up against a very potent rushing attack.

See when the Coaching staff thinks they are not going up against a potent attack, they become more aggressive, but Zimmer needs to be like Gregg Williams and not be so predicatable.

See everyone thought Williams was going to bring the house against Bledsoe in the Commanders game, and he didnt (which may have been a mistake) but that is just an example of him being totally unpredicatble, like Bill Belichek.

We have the play makers on defense, it is just the play calling and the lack of creativity that is the problem.

- Mike G.

 

[scottsp]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

Absolutely, Juke.

The base premise of the 3-4 is to confuse the offensive front by basically disguising the identity of the fourth rusher. Of course, you can blitz and vary off of this alignment, but as you say, ours is unimaginative to say the least.

You know where we are coming from. I know it. Even Nors knows. That in mind, I do believe NFL coordinators and personnel are going to identify our attack points without batting an eye.

It bothers me more than offenses which typically have trouble running the football are doing very well against us.

Many of us felt there would be a period of adjustment with this thing, but I did not expect the Niners and Raiders to chew us up on the ground. I shudder to think about what lies ahead.

 

[junk]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

I agree completely. We had talked about this a bit last week.

Maybe its just an adjustment period...maybe its a lack of dynamic LBers that are capable of blitzing.

 

[diehard2294]

true,every reason why a vet coach of the 3-4 should have been brought in. We should not be doing the learn as you go with players as well as the coaches

 

[ghst187]

yep, you're dead on.
In fact, we're getting LESS heat on the QB when we blitz than we did last year out of the 4-3. We bring 7 and we still get blocked by 6 and the QB stands around and finds someone. The only time we get sacks are when the coverage is perfect.

 

[Rogerthat12]

I think we may not be good enough to run it properly..young guys..new scheme and a coach who does not know it well in Zimmer..the 4-3 nuanced is still there but you are correct we are not running it the way it was designed.

 

[NorTex]

First of all, we haven't given up more than 24 points on defense in the first four games. (Rember the 49ers defense scored a TD)

We held the Raiders, in their home stadium, to 19 measly points.

All this and we have so many new players on the Defense and a bunch of rookies.

The future looks bright! Or do you not remember how bad our 4-3 was last year?

 

[Juke99]

First of all, we haven't given up more than 24 points on defense in the first four games. (Rember the 49ers defense scored a TD)

We held the Raiders, in their home stadium, to 19 measly points.

All this and we have so many new players on the Defense and a bunch of rookies.

The future looks bright! Or do you not remember how bad our 4-3 was last year?

...not the point....we also haven't created turnover and easy scores...we have a 3 yard at a pop offense, which has to drive the entire length of the field and not make a single mistake, to score.

I wouldn't only judge this defense by points allowed.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

And we're getting our arses kicked along the edge on running plays.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I agree completely. We had talked about this a bit last week.

Maybe its just an adjustment period...maybe its a lack of dynamic LBers that are capable of blitzing.

But if we don't have linebackers that can play the scheme... why are we playing it?

 

[Cbz40]

But if we don't have linebackers that can play the scheme... why are we playing it?

Ummmmmm good point.

 

[Sarge]

But if we don't have linebackers that can play the scheme... why are we playing it?

But we are DEEP with DL, so instead of playing 4 of them, we only play 3, thus allowing us to get our mediocre LB's out there.

It all makes a lot of sense if you're a mow-ron.

 

[NorTex]

Here are the Raiders stats in their first four games. I'd say our 3-4 defense is playing as well as any of the other "elite" teams that the Raiders have played.

Raiders vs Cowboys

333 Total net yards

129 Rushing yards

204 Net yards Passing

Raiders vs Philly

363 Total net yards

21 Rushing yards

344 Net Passing yards

18 First downs

Raiders vs KC

327 Total net yards

71 Rushing yards

256 Net Passing yards


Raiders vs Patriots

351 Total Net Yards

92 Rushing yards

259 Net Passing Yards

 

[Juke99]

And we're getting our arses kicked along the edge on running plays.

Yep..in fact, we have more depth on the D line that we do at LB.

We'd have a heck of a solid rotation in a 4-3 alignment.

 

[Juke99]

Here are the Raiders stats in their first four games. I'd say our 3-4 defense is playing as well as any of the other "elite" teams that the Raiders have played.

Raiders vs Cowboys

333 Total net yards

129 Rushing yards

204 Net yards Passing

Raiders vs Philly

363 Total net yards

21 Rushing yards

344 Net Passing yards

18 First downs

Raiders vs KC

327 Total net yards

71 Rushing yards

256 Net Passing yards


Raiders vs Patriots

351 Total Net Yards

92 Rushing yards

259 Net Passing Yards

Sorry but I'm not buying.

The goal of this alignment was to bring about more turnovers...sacks, etc...

It's not about yardage.

Heck, Zimmer's old defenses looked great when it came to total yardage.

 

[scottsp]

This is a linebacker driven defense, supposedly. These guys must make plays. But hell, they have a hard enough time checking their responsibilities. They can't get off blocks. Our inside backers are too busy fighting off guards and fullbacks. The outside guys aren't filling when tight ends are blocking down.

That's about as elementary as it gets for a linebacker. If they can't function on that elementary level, how are they supposed to make plays?

At linebacker, these kids need to understand that fighting off blocks is essential in this alignment. This isn't the 4-3 where defensive tackles do all the grunt work while backers flow freely to the ball. There is a tradeoff. Guards are uncovered in this alignment. We have got to play more physical at the point of attack.

I don't wish to convey that I am throwing my hands up in the air on this 3-4 thing. Until Demarcus Ware figures some things out and steps it up, we will continue to struggle. Burnett needs snaps and time to get acclamated as well. This will take some time. I understand that. Most of us expected these sorts of growing pains.

I think there will come a time when guys like Ware, Burnett, Spears, and Canty will make all kinds of plays. Big plays. But much of the time, right now, they're doing all the can to figure this NFL thing out. And at this time, they're just "guys."

 

[odog422]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

you know, i was watching ware a lot this game and i got disgusted the number of times i saw him running off the line at the snap to cover an area, which many times had no one in it. he also spent an inordinate amount of time "floating," not rushing, not pursuing, not doing much of anything until after the fact.

of course a large part of this is due to his inexperience, but i also believe you have to make a decision that when you acquire this guy, you acquire him to rush the passer. so let him. he will learn and he will gain recognition as he goes along, but you take the one area of his game he is lauded for and strip him of it by trying to get him to play perfect OLB technique.

which goes to your point -- i believe that zimmer has a fundamental understanding of the 3-4, and those fundamentals are drilled into our defense. which is a good thing....except that as you point out, one of the main benefits of going to the 3-4 is to create unexpected pressure. i think we are hamstrung in that regard bc zimmer wants to make sure he has all the bases covered defensively.

unfortunately, i think this translates to a 3-4 that is robotic and reactionary, not aggressive and forcing the issue, which translates to the crazy success teams have against us in long yardage situations. we play coverage instead of focusing on bringing the pressure. in other words, not to lose. and of course, inevitably, coverage breaks down.

frustrating.

 

[Payton34Smith22]

Just to change the focus here....

I have watched this very closely...and then watched tapes of other 3-4 defenses.

One of the advantages to running a 3-4, perhaps the greatest advantage, is that it creates confusion for the offense because of uncertainty as to where the pass rush is coming from.

That said, our "3-4" is nothing like that. We don't line up 3 D-linemen and 2 outside backers at the line in pass rushing situations causing the offense confusion as to which, or whether both, LB's are going to rusn. Instead, we either drop Ware into coverage and NO LB rushes from the other side or we rush him like a standard 4-3 end with his hand on the ground.

There is ZERO element of surprise.

So, what am I missing here?

This pass rush defense looks like a 4-3 with an even lighter DE (Ware) than we had last year.

I agree 100%!