4-3 vs 3-4. Let's thrash this out

[gkekoa]

Talent wise, football teams are usually fairly even. Scheme is just as important as the players frequently. That's why teams like Pittsburgh find so many gems...the way their 3-4 is run makes everybody stars and the same thing happens in Baltimore. If you ever want to find guys who play well, then go elsewhere and flounder...look no further.

The 3-4 keeps QBs guessing. They don't know exactly where the pass rush is coming from, unless you tip them off.

[Enter Apotheosis]

I said right at the beginning it wasn't a anti Haslett rant, but I really think I countered your comments and everyone and his dog is beating me with a ****ty stick.

Welcome to ES

I do note on your 3-4 thread that you admit that a NT is the most difficult position to find, but you seem to counteract this in your post in this thread.

In any given draft there will maybe be 4-8 viable NT candidates available assuming you're looking strictly for someone with 2-gap ability or potential. What I was talking about earlier was how there isn't a very high premium placed on the position because the skillset a NT possesses is one that would be a luxury for most NFL teams and may render them less useful than other available DTs. Truly elite prospects are rare and only seem to come along once every three or four years. As such, while the best NT prospect in any given class does tend to be drafted in the first round they rarely make it into the top 10 and typically go in the 15-25 range. Beyond that you'll usually have one or two guys with a second round grade and the remaining prospects in that class will be scattered throughout the remainder of the draft.

Good NTs have come from all over the draft, which is a good thing if you have good scouting and are fortunate for that guy to be there when you're drafting (this alludes to the other comment I made in this thread). However, the fact that there are not many of them to choose from in any given draft and that all but the top one or two tend to be developmental picks complicates matters. It is a very hard position to fill... but it is not impossible and, in many ways, the difficulty corresponds directly to how much you expect out of the position. If you expect a Wilfork, Hampton, or Raji... well, good luck.

Hitman: Can't open that PM since ES is still a bit bugged, not sure if there's a workaround I haven't figured out yet or what.

[Darth Tater]

I think if you look around the league, it's pretty plain to see that with the proper personel and some time together that the 3-4 is the more successful defense in today's NFL. I think the 4-3 was structured to deal with run first teams better and there just isn't many teams that consistently win with that type of offensive mentality. So the aggressive get after the QB style of the 3-4 tends to be better.

I'm sure over time that will flip flop again as I'm sure someone will become successful with run first as everyone switches to the 3-4 and a Gibbs like coach somewhere takes advantage of it, but for now, I think it would be hard to argue that the 4-3 is the more successful defense.

Actually, a bit opposite. The 3-4 was one of the best defenses against the run and much of the reason it fell into disuse was because the NFL became a bit more pass happy. It was the genius of guys like LeBeau who figured out how to turn it into a solid pass defense system.

---------- Post added April-4th-2011 at 09:09 PM ----------

Talent wise, football teams are usually fairly even. Scheme is just as important as the players frequently. That's why teams like Pittsburgh find so many gems...the way their 3-4 is run makes everybody stars and the same thing happens in Baltimore. If you ever want to find guys who play well, then go elsewhere and flounder...look no further.

The 3-4 keeps QBs guessing. They don't know exactly where the pass rush is coming from, unless you tip them off.

The problem is that the zone blitz creates for the QB is that there is a body in the pass lane where there's not supposed to be a body. This means that the QB either pulls the ball down when he sees there's somebody there or put the ball into a place were interception or a PD is probably going to happen.

[SirClintonPortis]

I think if you look around the league, it's pretty plain to see that with the proper personel and some time together that the 3-4 is the more successful defense in today's NFL. I think the 4-3 was structured to deal with run first teams better and there just isn't many teams that consistently win with that type of offensive mentality. So the aggressive get after the QB style of the 3-4 tends to be better.

I'm sure over time that will flip flop again as I'm sure someone will become successful with run first as everyone switches to the 3-4 and a Gibbs like coach somewhere takes advantage of it, but for now, I think it would be hard to argue that the 4-3 is the more successful defense.

The 3-4 variants sucks against the run when you don't have the powerful space eaters up front, like with us last season. What happens is that the LBs get trucked because the O-linemen only have to single team the 3 D-linemen.

When you do have the players, it can be downright suffocating because of the pure power the O-linemen have to deal with. Guys like Cullen Jenkins are hellishly difficult to block with one guy, and Jenkins isn't even a NT. They are a threat to gain penetration on almost every play.

I think the 4-3 systems are more compatible with lesser talent on the D-line and/or linebacking corps. But for a 4-3 to be really good, you need to have some great talent up front as well, but require players with a different skillset than those in a 3-4. This isn't even going into the different variants and philosophies a 4-3 D can have. A Blache defense is much different from what's being used in Indy, for example.

---------- Post added April-4th-2011 at 11:45 PM ----------

Talent wise, football teams are usually fairly even. Scheme is just as important as the players frequently. That's why teams like Pittsburgh find so many gems...the way their 3-4 is run makes everybody stars and the same thing happens in Baltimore. If you ever want to find guys who play well, then go elsewhere and flounder...look no further.

The 3-4 keeps QBs guessing. They don't know exactly where the pass rush is coming from, unless you tip them off.

Pittsburgh finds gems because they know what skills to look for in the players they are scouting. They don't draft a guy like Rocky Mac onto their team. It's not because the Rocky Mac-type player can't play, it's just that he cannot accomplish the system asks him to do very well.

[Dirt]

I'd like to see a stat on how many top 'sack-getters' are DE's or OLBs. I think it's a bit more dangerous to have the OLB screaming around the outside. Puts a little more fear in the QB having to worry about an Orakpo coming up on his blindside, whether that be his left or right. In other words, the action of the rusher getting past the blocker would be harder to catch if it's not the DE immediately engaging with the blocker right in front of the QB.

And as others have said, I believe the 3-4 is harder to read. You can argue either way you want, but the whole reasons we had this Albert problem, and the whole reason of having a dominant NT is obviously to make up for the lack of a man on the line. If you have a man who can take on 2 blockers, I think there's no question the 3-4 is superior. A lot more action/possibilities for the OLBs to work their way to the QB.

I think a traditional pass rushing DE is A-trying to get to the QB, B-trying to just create havoc. Whereas, Brian Orakpo's job is simply to get to the QB. And if you have a guy that can to that, you're in business.

I guess the secondary is about the same, but now you need heavier guys (LBs) to be able to drop into coverage. It's simple: If you can find guys who can do that, you've got a superior defense that's harder to read, and a bigger threat to the QB. It's all about the personnel. And although I hated on Haslett big time(I know you said this isn't about Has) It's just gonna take time to get those guys in there. So far, so good I would say. Screw what the other teams are doing. Screw the comparison to Green Bay. This defense is developing its own identity, and I predict a big jump next year. As in, a jump from worst in the league. I expect good things from this D next year.

[KDawg]

My take is two fold. First, 4 d-linemen against 5 o-linemen is slightly fairer in a matchup of the fat boys in the trenches and it takes some pressure off the linebackers.

How does it take more pressure off of the backers? Think about it like this. The 4-3 is generally run as a 1-gap system. The 3-4 is generally run as a two gap. In the 1 gap, you're shooting four gaps, which will occupy four linemen and leave one to get to the second level. In the 2 gap you'll usually have two guys attempting doubles and one trying to take on just one guy. In theory, the 2-gap 3-4 defense accounts for all the linemen, where the 4-3 1-gap does not. Now, that theory doesn't always apply, but in the 3-4, you'll generally be sending at least one linebacker.

People put too much emphasis on "systems" in the NFL. And by systems I mean alignment. Outside linebackers in the 3-4 are generally the size of 4-3 DEs or close to it, and the WILL is generally a guy who will be the 4th rusher. The difference between the 1-gap and 2-gap systems is size of the linemen and some base responsibilities of all parties involved.

And secondly I think it's easier to find 4-3 personnel than it is to find 3-4 people.

Generally this is the case because most kids grew up playing in the 4-3, then went to a college who ran the 4-3. You don't see many guys coming in with a ton of experience in the 3 front 2-gap.

Take this year's draft, some fine looking DTs but a dominant NT? I can't see one to be honest. Same thing for OLBs, I think they've got to be that much more athletic (a al Demarcus Ware) than what's required in the 4-3.

What you're missing here is that you're comparing OLBs in the 3-4 to OLBs in the 4-3. It's a different position for the most part. The WILL in the 3-4 is pretty much just a stand up end that sometimes drops into coverage.

Ware is definitely an athlete, but let's not sell 4-3 OLB short in the athleticism department. It's about size and athleticism with the 3-4 OLB.

[K.O. Johnny]

How does it take more pressure off of the backers? Think about it like this. The 4-3 is generally run as a 1-gap system. The 3-4 is generally run as a two gap. In the 1 gap, you're shooting four gaps, which will occupy four linemen and leave one to get to the second level. In the 2 gap you'll usually have two guys attempting doubles and one trying to take on just one guy. In theory, the 2-gap 3-4 defense accounts for all the linemen, where the 4-3 1-gap does not. Now, that theory doesn't always apply, but in the 3-4, you'll generally be sending at least one linebacker.

People put too much emphasis on "systems" in the NFL. And by systems I mean alignment. Outside linebackers in the 3-4 are generally the size of 4-3 DEs or close to it, and the WILL is generally a guy who will be the 4th rusher. The difference between the 1-gap and 2-gap systems is size of the linemen and some base responsibilities of all parties involved.

Generally this is the case because most kids grew up playing in the 4-3, then went to a college who ran the 4-3. You don't see many guys coming in with a ton of experience in the 3 front 2-gap.

What you're missing here is that you're comparing OLBs in the 3-4 to OLBs in the 4-3. It's a different position for the most part. The WILL in the 3-4 is pretty much just a stand up end that sometimes drops into coverage.

Ware is definitely an athlete, but let's not sell 4-3 OLB short in the athleticism department. It's about size and athleticism with the 3-4 OLB.

thank you kdawg

That's all i was hoping for - points and counter arguments without people getting pissy with me

[S.T.real,lights,out]

It's hard for me to say right now. We ran the 3-4 without the right guys last season. I love seeing Rak off the line and coming off the edge. But i hate seeing us gashed for 10 yards a run. We need a big time NT and help at DE and OLB. If we can get atleast two of them this offseason i think we should have a better idea in the direction we are heading.

[wilco_holland]

Based on my personal view, I would be running a hybrid 4-3. I like my d-lineman creating running holes for my LB´s en DB´s and use a lot of position and fromation chances. DT´s need to able to play DE, DE´s need to be able to kick inside, LB´s at DE, DE´s at LB.

But I do agree that against the run a 3-4 front could strugle because of a lack of strenght at the OLB position.

And I think it is a fact that there are more quality and natural fit players for a 4-3 the an 3-4. Some of the 3-4 players are hard to find, like a NT.

But creating mismatches and keeping the QB gessing is what you need to do as a D#.....D# is no longer a group of guys playing D#, D# is a group of guys attacking the opponents off.

[Master Blaster]

Actually, a bit opposite. The 3-4 was one of the best defenses against the run and much of the reason it fell into disuse was because the NFL became a bit more pass happy. It was the genius of guys like LeBeau who figured out how to turn it into a solid pass defense system.

Thank you.

A lot of confusion when it comes to the 3-4. It's biggest strength is against the run, as it gives you numbers. The best way to beat the 3-4 is to spread it out.

[Madison Redskin]

I think the 3-4 is harder for an opposing QB to read because he doesn't have as good of an idea of where all the pass rushers are coming from. It is a difficult defense to implement without a top-notch NT though

That's true, but it's usually easier to run against 3-4 fronts.

[Conn]

That's true, but it's usually easier to run against 3-4 fronts.

That's not true. Read the previous page.

[MR2Drift]

The biggest advantage the 4-3 is gonna have in the future is the ability to find players that fit in the system. One of the benefits of the 3-4 early on was that since so few teams ran that D you can get talented players at later rounds since there was little demand for those type of players, now the 4-3 will have that advantage. It will be interesting how this plays out in the future, whats better the 3-4 scheme or a 4-3 with superior talent.

[Madison Redskin]

That's not true. Read the previous page.

Posters made a few comments saying "it's harder to run against a 3-4 front," but they didn't include a lot of evidence to back up those claims. Admittedly, neither did I.

[HRNY4ZRNY]

I think we should stay with the 3-4

It is harder for opposing QB's to read.

In a 4-3 you send 4 DL almost everytime.

In a 3-4 you send 3 DL with your choice of a LB which the QB doesnt know which one is coming.

I think we just need to be patient and hope we get some solid players in the draft. Quinn, Von Miller, Paea, Taylor...

[Darth Tater]

Posters made a few comments saying "it's harder to run against a 3-4 front," but they didn't include a lot of evidence to back up those claims. Admittedly, neither did I.

The key to stopping the run since Lombardi introduced the run to daylight scheme has been to show daylight and then shut it down. This is why Landry developed his "Flex Defense". Disadvantage of the flex scheme is that the directional pre-snap read must be correct for it to work (you have to know who to flex) and the ability to make the proper pre-snap read can be severely limited with properly designed pre-snap motion which can even change the angle of attack. In the 3-4, guys are already flexed by nature of the system and the backers can read on the fly thus making the RB daylight reads harder. Further, you get more speed on the field without having to sacrifice as much size as the 50 nickel (also originally designed to stop run-to-daylight). Speed is the second biggest key to shutting down the run to daylight scheme of Lombardi after proper diagnosis of the play.

[DFlo]

a little OT, but does anyone know how many posts you need to be able to create a thread? I can't seem to create one for some reason

[Conn]

a little OT, but does anyone know how many posts you need to be able to create a thread? I can't seem to create one for some reason

There is no requirement, anyone can start a thread.

hmmm...new guy...stupid question...just joined...are you the one bumping these old threads with poll votes?

Just kidding...kinda.

[redskins55]

Shanahan in my opinion nailed his own coffin when he decided to switch the defense. Its hard enough to install a brand new offense in one season, but trying to install a new offense and defense at the same time is almost unheard of. His downfall in Denver was the defense because he stuck with the 4-3 for to long while his offense was hitting on all cylinders . His downfall in D.C will be changing a top ten 4-3 defense into a lousy 3-4 defense. Now, instead of spending draft picks to shop for 3-4 personnel we have to shop for Shanny offensive weapons and 3-4 defensive weapons.

Death Sentence!

[Diesel__44]

Shanahan in my opinion nailed his own coffin when he decided to switch the defense. Its hard enough to install a brand new offense in one season, but trying to install a new offense and defense at the same time is almost unheard of. His downfall in Denver was the defense because he stuck with the 4-3 for to long while his offense was hitting on all cylinders . His downfall in D.C will be changing a top ten 4-3 defense into a lousy 3-4 defense. Now, instead of spending draft picks to shop for 3-4 personnel we have to shop for Shanny offensive weapons and 3-4 defensive weapons.

Death Sentence!

Easy now. It's not like our old D was lights out. Yes #10 in 2009 out of 32 but never made a stop when we needed and wasn't good enough to make up for an average offense. The 10th ranks D is a misnomer. It’s not even in the top 30% which would suck for any sales industry....What was the Pts. allowed? (18th) What was the TOs created? (almost DEAD LAST). The tyranny of dull continues with a thread like this. The 3-4 is here to stay we just need to get the personnel to make it happen. It's a more than one year process.

[Madison Redskin]

Easy now. It's not like our old D was lights out. Yes #10 in 2009 out of 32 but never made a stop when we needed and wasn't good enough to make up for an average offense. The 10th ranks D is a misnomer. It’s not even in the top 30% which would suck for any sales industry....What was the Pts. allowed? (18th) What was the TOs created? (almost DEAD LAST). The tyranny of dull continues with a thread like this. The 3-4 is here to stay we just need to get the personnel to make it happen. It's a more than one year process.

The 2009 defense might have been average and dull, but it was unquestionably better than the porous POS defense we fielded in 2010.

[Diesel__44]

The 2009 defense might have been average and dull, but it was unquestionably better than the porous POS defense we fielded in 2010.

I agree. 31st overall is tuuurible. But much like the transition on offense and our 4-12 record from 2009. 6-10 is a baby step and I'm optimistic we'll take another step this year to mediocrity. In Shanahan I trust...Because if he fails, we might really be screwed.

[redskins55]

Easy now. It's not like our old D was lights out. Yes #10 in 2009 out of 32 but never made a stop when we needed and wasn't good enough to make up for an average offense. The 10th ranks D is a misnomer. It’s not even in the top 30% which would suck for any sales industry....What was the Pts. allowed? (18th) What was the TOs created? (almost DEAD LAST). The tyranny of dull continues with a thread like this. The 3-4 is here to stay we just need to get the personnel to make it happen. It's a more than one year process.

Ok lets put one thing to rest. There is absolutely no decided advantage by teams that run a 4-3 and teams that run a 3-4. Pittsburgh, New England, Baltimore and the Jets are all good teams. Just like the Bears, Colts, Saints, & Giants. It doesnt matter what they run the ywill be good because they have grade A talent. We dont!

And I'm with you Diesel, I love the 3-4 defense and its hear to stay..... But I only love it for a team that makes a COMMITMENT to install it. We switch to the 3-4 then trade our draft picks away for McNabb & Brown then use only one pick to draft Perry Riley! Whom plays ILB which isn't even a critical position of need in our 3-4! Like I said, if he didn't have to install a new offense then it would be ok to switch, but seeming that we needed an entire zone blocking offensive line, a west coast offensive QB, a possession WR, and a young speedy RB. I'd say this was the worst time in the world to switch the only thing that was good! Our 4-3 defense.

[Diesel__44]

Something to keep in mind...

According to former general manager Randy Mueller, “the 3–4 defensive end is easier to identify and find when it comes to scouting and acquiring personnel,” while 4–3 DEs “are rare and hard to find and therefore very expensive to keep. There is no question that speed pass rushers are very much an impact position on the football field and their cap numbers reflect that. On the other hand, 3–4 defensive ends can be found easier and are much less expensive when it comes to ‘cap dollars’.”[

[Conn]

Something to keep in mind...

According to former general manager Randy Mueller, “the 3–4 defensive end is easier to identify and find when it comes to scouting and acquiring personnel,” while 4–3 DEs “are rare and hard to find and therefore very expensive to keep. There is no question that speed pass rushers are very much an impact position on the football field and their cap numbers reflect that. On the other hand, 3–4 defensive ends can be found easier and are much less expensive when it comes to ‘cap dollars’.”[

Extending that, its harder to find 3-4 OLB's than it is to find 4-3 OLB's...so it balances out.