The absurdity of "4-3 personnel"

[erod]

It's easy to regurgitate unoriginal opinions. Especially when they sound reasoned and sophisticated. We've all heard our moms do it trying to "fit in" during a Neanderthal football-watching Sunday afternoon. Heck, we all do it in unfamiliar territory from time to time.

Kumbaya over.

The fingernail-on-the-chalkboard regurgitation this offseason has been the ever-so-popular, "Dallas is trying to force 3-4 personnel into a 4-3 scheme, and it won't work."

People I respect have said this, media and former coach alike. The NFL Network characters, struggling with postcareer irrelevance, puke it up ad nauseum.

Frankly, I find it stupid. I mean.....a miscalculation of reasoning. (My children have informed me that 'stupid' is now akin to an f-bomb, so they're told in wussification class, which falls right after cup stacking period.)

Let's completely ignore, for a second, that Demarcus Ware and Anthony Spencer have put their hand down hundreds of times in their careers already, or that Dallas played 4-3 often a year ago. In fact as we contemplate this mud-at-the-wall epiphany, if defensive players only "fit" one scheme....well, our Swiss cheesers certainly didn't fit the 3-4 either, did they? Scrap the team and start over, right?

The myriad of overthought fallacies in this theory would be impressive, if not for its utter garbage.

Can Sean Lee not play middle linebacker in any scheme? Of course he can. So can Carter. In fact, both could excel at outside linebacker, too, which one of them will.

Not worried in the least there.

Have we not clamored to get Jay Ratliff off the nose for years? The off-tackle (3-technique) will benefit him greatly, and possibly extend his career. And Hatcher has basically lined up inside and played well much of his career already. Yes, we need a nose tackle, but we needed that anyway, regardless of scheme.

This should only help.

I'm told we "only have press corners." OK, fine, we have "press corners". Does that mean Carr and Claiborne are useless in a zone? Does that mean Kiffen is disallowed from taking advantage of their press-coverage ability altogether? Does that mean that we might (gasp!), not play the EXACT SAME DEFENSE AS TAMPA did during Bush's first term? Oh my gawd, I KNEW this was going to be a disaster! Please, if anything, the secondary assignments are supposed to be much easier to understand, which should only help our young safeties. I expect our secondary play to improve dramatically.

Check.

Basically, all the fear is tied up in two players, Ware and Spencer. Hmm, so we're missing sleep that two of our best, most experienced players are going to have to adjust to only half their former responsibility? You mean, no longer covering tight ends and running backs 10 yards down field? You mean, rushing the passer EVERY time the other team drops back? And playing the run otherwise? You mean, putting their hand down as they did their entire college career and 1/3 of the time in the pros?

Check mate. It's silly.

We haven't played good defense around here since Zimmer and his 4-3 left town. I've been stomping around about going back to the 4-3 like a child for long as I can remember. I HATE the 3-4, what it does to your best pass rushers and how it takes pass rushing defensive ends out of draft consideration. Defensive lineman should do more than just occupy blockers.

I'll go on record: our defense will be the biggest improvement of the team next year, simply because of a change in scheme and the minds of Kiffin and Marinelli. These guys know what they're doing. The defense is simpler in design and understanding, and they're both known as great teachers. This team HAS considerable defensive talent, and these gents will take advantage of it finally. Unlike Coach Hair the past few.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

It's not absurd at all. Ask a Parcells two-gap 34 group to play Kiffin's scheme and it would be ugly.

As it stands now, we happen to have several guys like Ratliff and Lee and Carter who should be fine. But the idea that there's no real difference in the player types is just wrong. Even today, we don't have the depth we'd have if we'd been drafting for this scheme for two or three years.

 

[Frozen700]

We basically ran a 4-3 out of the 3-4 anyways.

We rushed 3, and then rushed Ware off the edge. Oh man, so creative.

The only difference is Ware was standing up and moving around sometimes.

People who say we are forcing a 4-3, with 3-4 talent, don't know football.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

It's not absurd at all. Ask a Parcells two-gap 34 group to play Kiffin's scheme and it would be ugly.

As it stands now, we happen to have several guys like Ratliff and Lee and Carter who should be fine. But the idea that there's no real difference in the player types is just wrong. Even today, we don't have the depth we'd have if we'd been drafting for this scheme for two or three years.

There is a difference, but our guys do well in there especially with our line backers playing behind them.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

We basically ran a 4-3 out of the 3-4 anyways.

We rushed 3, and then rushed Ware off the edge. Oh man, so creative.

The only difference is Ware was standing up and moving around sometimes.

People who say we are forcing a 4-3, with 3-4 talent, don't know football.

I know. I would say they're a bit misguided. It's really not much of a difference in terms of scheme. You just do what works. I think some people over think it like when people once harped on free or strong safety... I mean, let's get guys who can play both well. .

 

[Doomsday101]

I don't think the change will be hard. Most of these guys played the 4-3 before they came to Dallas. 4-3 is not going to be foreign to them.

 

[Frozen700]

I know. I would say they're a bit misguided. It's really not much of a difference in terms of scheme. You just do what works. I think some people over think it like when people once harped on free or strong safety... I mean, let's get guys who can play both well. .

I agree bro.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It's completely different in the front 7. However, the issue with the Corners is not really related to the 43. It's related to the Tampa2, which is a different thing all together. I would say this. It's harder for 43 personnel to play in a 34 then it is for 34 guys to play in a 43. As far as the CBs go, it is different to play press technique then Zone. The key to press is to stay in close physical contact for as long as you can and prevent the WRs from going where they want to on the field. Disrupt the routes. It's key to have a pass rush that get there when you play this technique because your not going to be able to press 20 yards down the field. In zone, you don't do that. You may get a bump of the line but your immediate responsibility is to get back into your zones and read the flow of the patterns. Run to the ball and make the play. Completely different and not all Press Coverage CBs can play this well because your taking their biggest strength away from them. They can't be physical with the WRs. Also, it's unwise, IMO, to pay for skilled press coverage CBs in a Tampa2 scheme because you are also going to have to pay for some pretty darn good Safeties and it can create a cap problem.

A lot in that piece I don't agree with.

 

[ghst187]

i agree with original post, esp the part about wussification class and dumbing down of our children.
anyway, the 4-3 should be easier for all our players. Ware/Spence only focus on two things instead of three. Our DL should fit the 4-3 better than 3-4 and also be easier for them to grasp. Imagine Lee and Carter not worrying as much about OL hitting them so they can focus solely on finding the ball...
Our secondary not forced to constant press and man coverage but rather our weakest areas being able to disguised better with more zone and blended coverage....sounds like a dream come true all around honestly.
I do find it funny though how much most of us wish Zimmer was back after everyone (most of us here) wanting to throw him under the bus every year he was here.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

We basically ran a 4-3 out of the 3-4 anyways.

We rushed 3, and then rushed Ware off the edge. Oh man, so creative.

The only difference is Ware was standing up and moving around sometimes.

People who say we are forcing a 4-3, with 3-4 talent, don't know football.

That's far from the only difference. We played an over under type scheme and we influenced the run with tackle penetration. We will do some of the same things in this scheme but the tackles will play much differently. DE's responsibilities are also completely different.

The LBs are all together different in a 43 vs a 34. It's like night and day. Defensive backfield is completely different as well.

 

[erod]

It's completely different in the front 7. However, the issue with the Corners is not really related to the 43. It's related to the Tampa2, which is a different thing all together. I would say this. It's harder for 43 personnel to play in a 34 then it is for 34 guys to play in a 43. As far as the CBs go, it is different to play press technique then Zone. The key to press is to stay in close physical contact for as long as you can and prevent the WRs from going where they want to on the field. Disrupt the routes. It's key to have a pass rush that get there when you play this technique because your not going to be able to press 20 yards down the field. In zone, you don't do that. You may get a bump of the line but your immediate responsibility is to get back into your zones and read the flow of the patterns. Run to the ball and make the play. Completely different and not all Press Coverage CBs can play this well because your taking their biggest strength away from them. They can't be physical with the WRs. Also, it's unwise, IMO, to pay for skilled press coverage CBs in a Tampa2 scheme because you are also going to have to pay for some pretty darn good Safeties and it can create a cap problem.

A lot in that piece I don't agree with.

I know the scheme is different, but it doesn't take completely different football players to play it necessarily. Ware and Spencer will be good at the ends, just watch, and it will keep them out of coverage.

In fact, I'd argue that Dallas was better suited for the 4-3 all along. The 3-4 certainly wasn't getting it done.

 

[CF74]

Nice rant.

Teams can go from a 3-4 to the 4-3 without much issues if any at all.

The problem is going from a 4-3 to the 3-4, now that becomes an issue..

 

[Yakuza Rich]

It's not silly because scheme and personnel is important in the NFL. It's why there is a high rate of FA busts. You can't just plug guys in, they have to fit the scheme. I think Joe Montana was great, but if he were in an Air Coryell type system I don't think we ever hear about him.

The thing is I think the Cowboys have the personnel for the 4-3, particularly Kiffin's 4-3. Like you said, Ware and Spencer have put their hand on the ground thousands of times in their career. It's not an issue for them. If they were short guys with short arms, then I would be concerned. Ratliff has always been a gap shooter. Hatcher less so, but he's always been a good pass rusher and that is what he'll do in the 4-3. And Lissemore is really a better fit as he is a former track runner with a lot of burst and will no longer have to use upper body power to play every down.

Lee isn't exactly London Fletcher or Urlacher in deep zone coverage. But Kiffin style defenses have gotten away from that because the athletic TE's and Lee is excellent in short and intermediate coverage. And Carter is even more athletic. That falls to the SAM spot which Kiffin has a history of taking speedy veterans at a cheap price; enter Durant.

I have some concern at Corner because Kiffin's scheme usually has better tackling corners. But, I think we can make that up with being more athletic in coverage.

If we were going to a Zimmer style scheme where we were 'stop the run first, stop the run second and then go after the QB' with a prototypical 1-tech; I would not be very enthused about the defense.

But we don't have this. It will be more like Jimmy's defenses. Shooting gaps hard with lots and lots of speed.

I really liked the 3-4, but the offenses have changed to beat it now. Teams either go with all of these WR's and the QB in the shotgun and throw it all day (i.e. Green Bay) or they use the Read Option and put the OLB's in bad positions (i.e. Washington).

We needed to change the scheme to beat those. With the passing teams, we can always have 4 good pass rushers going after the QB instead of sending either Ware or Spencer in coverage. With read option offenses, we'll have enough speed and will shoot the gaps to get to the QB before he can make a play fake.






YR

 

[TheCount]

I might be alone, and I don't listen to a lot of talking heads, but I haven't heard all this critisim about our personnel going 4-3 other than the obvious - no true 1 tech, didn't have a Sam and safety questions. All of which are valid.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I know the scheme is different, but it doesn't take completely different football players to play it necessarily. Ware and Spencer will be good at the ends, just watch, and it will keep them out of coverage.

In fact, I'd argue that Dallas was better suited for the 4-3 all along. The 3-4 certainly wasn't getting it done.

Yeah, it does. First, you have to recognize the fact that we are not talking about just a change from a 34 to a 43 but a change to the Tampa2 as well.

Your MLB is absolutely unique in this scheme. We are fortunate that we have a player like Lee, most teams do not. That's why most teams don't use a Tampa2 scheme. It's true that your OLBs can come down and play DE in many cases but lets say you were a 43 moving to a 34, the reverse is often not applicable. DE's, in most cases can't play OLB in a 34. That's a definite personnel issue. In a traditional 34, which we did not play, your NT is unique. Also, your DE's are unique. They are more like DTs. In our scheme, we ran more of a hybrid over under, as I said before so it's really not a traditional comparison. To make a general statement that says it's not as difficult to change from a 43 to a 34 or vice versa, I don't think I would agree with that. Now, if you are saying that we are a bit unique in our personnel and so because of that, we are in a much better position to change from a 34 to a 43, that I would agree with much more but I don't think that is a blanket statement. It's a statement that is unique to us IMO.

 

[VACowboy]

I've always thought the Dallas personnel fit a 4-3 scheme better than a 3-4, especially a Kiffen-style 4-3 where the DT's are shooting gaps and DE's play the run on the way to the QB. In my mind, Ratliff's best position is 3-tech. The nose in Kiffin's defense plays more of a 1-tech than a 0 and his job is to make plays in the backfield, not occupy blocks, read and react. This suits Hatcher's and Lissemore's games to a T. Ware and Spencer going after the QB on every play instead of reading run/pass and/or dropping into coverage is a fantastic idea in my book. And Lee and Carter are both athletic guys who cover well and make plays sideline to sideline. The biggest issue I see is a 3-tech to back up Rat, but then, we've never had anybody behind him.

Kiffen coaches a 4-3 and certainly has schemes he likes, but he's a wise old guy and I firmly believe that he'll tailor his defense to the strengths of his players.

 

[Frozen700]

That's far from the only difference. We played an over under type scheme and we influenced the run with tackle penetration. We will do some of the same things in this scheme but the tackles will play much differently. DE's responsibilities are also completely different.

The LBs are all together different in a 43 vs a 34. It's like night and day. Defensive backfield is completely different as well.

Of course not.

But to say we have to jump over the Walls of Jericho to switch to this scheme is stupid.

It will not be that much of a difference or head ache to run this scheme.

Switching from a base 4-3, to and exotic style of 3-4 i believe is way more difficult

 

[AMERICAS_FAN]

I've always thought the Dallas personnel fit a 4-3 scheme better than a 3-4, especially a Kiffen-style 4-3 where the DT's are shooting gaps and DE's play the run on the way to the QB. In my mind, Ratliff's best position is 3-tech. The nose in Kiffin's defense plays more of a 1-tech than a 0 and his job is to make plays in the backfield, not occupy blocks, read and react. This suits Hatcher's and Lissemore's games to a T. Ware and Spencer going after the QB on every play instead of reading run/pass and/or dropping into coverage is a fantastic idea in my book. And Lee and Carter are both athletic guys who cover well and make plays sideline to sideline. The biggest issue I see is a 3-tech to back up Rat, but then, we've never had anybody behind him.

Kiffen coaches a 4-3 and certainly has schemes he likes, but he's a wise old guy and I firmly believe that he'll tailor his defense to the strengths of his players.

The bolded part above is the key here. In all his years, Kiffin has the experience to efectively adjust his scheme to fit his players' strengths.

And given that our 2 best defenders are better utilized on the line (i.e. stopping the run and pass rushing) than than in space (i.e. out in coverage) I think they can better fit the 4-3 and truly play to their best potential.

In the 3-4 it seemed thae scheme csame first and players had to be shoved into it, often times playing away from their strength to get them lined up.

Tht's why I'm glad we're back to the 4-3, especially with a coach like Kiffin who can maximize the players' potential within it.

 

[Doomsday101]

I've always thought the Dallas personnel fit a 4-3 scheme better than a 3-4, especially a Kiffen-style 4-3 where the DT's are shooting gaps and DE's play the run on the way to the QB. In my mind, Ratliff's best position is 3-tech. The nose in Kiffin's defense plays more of a 1-tech than a 0 and his job is to make plays in the backfield, not occupy blocks, read and react. This suits Hatcher's and Lissemore's games to a T. Ware and Spencer going after the QB on every play instead of reading run/pass and/or dropping into coverage is a fantastic idea in my book. And Lee and Carter are both athletic guys who cover well and make plays sideline to sideline. The biggest issue I see is a 3-tech to back up Rat, but then, we've never had anybody behind him.

Kiffen coaches a 4-3 and certainly has schemes he likes, but he's a wise old guy and I firmly believe that he'll tailor his defense to the strengths of his players.

I agree. I would say outside of system and the X's and O's the one thing i hear from a lot of former players is how Kiffin and Marinalle bring excitment and passion to their unit.

John Lynch:
For both of them, Monte and Rod, I think first and foremost is the absolute passion for coaching the game of football and getting the best out of their players. I think you can talk about scheme, you can talk about how they go about their business, but the No. 1 thing to me is they make football fun. They’re passionate about it, and that to me is contagious. It certainly was when we were in Tampa.

http://www.***BANNED-URL***/sports/...id-to-get-input-from-players.ece?ssimg=852413

Or as Kiffin himself said:

Amid all the talk about new Dallas defensive coordinator Monte Kiffin changing the Cowboys from a 3-4 to a 4-3 front, Kiffin himself says that talk is largely overblown.

“They drafted for a 3-4 defense here, but believe it or not, you actually do have some people that can play a 4-3,” Kiffin told reporters Thursday. “A 3-4 or 4-3 doesn’t matter. Last time I checked you’ve got 11 guys on the field. Not eight, not nine, not 10 — we have 12, that’s not good, either, you get a penalty. But you’ve got 11 guys out there and it doesn’t matter 3-4 or 4-3.”

Kiffin said that what really matters is that his players play hard, play fast and play together as a team.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/15/monte-kiffin-3-4-or-4-3-doesnt-matter/

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Of course not.

But to say we have to jump over the Walls of Jericho to switch to this scheme is stupid.

It will not be that much of a difference or head ache to run this scheme.

Switching from a base 4-3, to and exotic style of 3-4 i believe is way more difficult

I agree, it is more difficult to switch from a 4-3 to a 3-4 IMO but I've already stated that.

I don't agree with your opinion on the rest. It remains to be seen how well we make the transition. I personally think our personnel is good for the switch but we still have weakness' there IMO. Until somebody proves they can play safety, it's a weakness in the worst possible place for a Tampa2. Until Lee proves he can play the MLB in that scheme, it's a weakness. Until we prove that we have the rotation to play a penetrating 4 man front, it's a weakness. I like our chances but we are far from proven IMO.