Barney B Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 I hear this a lot: "The 3-4 defense is not a physical defense." "The 3-4 is weak against the run." But it's not necessarily true. Check out the Steeler's defense from last year: http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/statistics/aga_ru_yds.html Number 1 in the league against the run, AND number 1 in sacks. This is stronger than Monica Lewinski's mouthwash. Now, mind you, without good personnel, it's hard to be successful with a 3-4, but that's also true of the 4-3. So don't assume you can't be good, or play smashmouth, with a 3-4, because the '86 Giants beat the Redskins 3 times in one year, demolished the league, and won the Super Bowl, with a 3-4 defense, and I still hate them for it. Thank you and good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 We dont need to go to a 3-4 defense when the current D linemen are suited forit or in favor of playing in it. It's far more simpler to get a DT to compliment Big Daddy Wilkinson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Well, Brad Johnson and that awful Tampa OL did hand the Burgh 10 sacks in a single game. That kinda pads the stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 The 3-4 has had it's moments, but by in large, it has failed more times than it has succeeded. There is a reason that you saw about 12 teams trying to run the 3-4 ten years ago and only a couple doing so now - you have to have the perfect personel or it will leave you vulnerable to smash mouth teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacky Ralph Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by RySkins There is a reason that you saw about 12 teams trying to run the 3-4 ten years ago and only a couple doing so now - you have to have the perfect personel or it will leave you vulnerable to smash mouth teams. I'd agree with that. Yes. I'm not going to pay alot for my muffler. It's not TV, it's HBO. I think Philly made a booboo when they spent the entire draft trying to find the right players to beat the Rams. I think you need to FIRST get the talent to beat the teams in your own division. And in the NFC East, the 4-3 makes much more sense than the 3-4. It's the cheesiest!!!! The 3-4 works best against teams that are more "finesse" than smash-mouth. And the NY Giants are the only team with a questionable OL that we'll play in our division. The Eagles have a great set of run-blocking OTs and Dallas has been killing us with their "triplets" of Emmit, Allen, and Adams. In the East at least, the 4-3 is the way to go. With a name like Smuckers, it's got to be good. Besides, Coleman and Bruce Smith are too old and not physical enough to play the 3-4. Dude, you're getting a Dell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 :snore: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacky Ralph Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Hey!!!!!!! Someone put a taco in my posts!!!!! How did that happen???? I'm telling you right now, if someone is using black magic to include pictures with what I write, than I want NO part of it. Jesus strongly warned us against using black magic. Remeber his parable about the skinny boy and his talking frog???? White magic is OK, though. I think David Copperfield might be a homosexual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 :rotflmao: Much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark Horse Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 The one thing no one mentioned is that Big Daddy and Bruce are poor fits in a 3-4. I know Bruce did well in Buffalo's 3-4, but Bruce's body can't handle that beating anymore. Ends in a 3-4 get the piss beat out of them. Remember, our 4-3 defense plus home games on grass were main reasons Bruce wanted to come here. I'm not sure if you saw Big Daddy play in a 3-4 but he did not do too well in it. But then again, he was in Cincinatti. :laugh: Just something to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 The 3-4 defense is difficult to run because you have to have specific personnel at NT and the DE slots that match up with that kind of alignment. Because college players don't come out having played the NT position or the DE in the 3-4 you have to PROJECT guys to that type of system and that is often difficult to do. On the veteran side, the problem is players like Dan Wilkinson who COULD play in a 3-4 as a DE or NT don't WANT TO. The 3-4 makes stars of the linebackers and asks the DL to take the abuse inside and be anonymous. In the era when defensive linemen are getting big dollars tied to sack totals and hurries none of these guys wants to move to a system where the stats just aren't to be had. The other factor is the 3-4 requires you to have SUPERIOR linebackers. While there are a quantity of veteran linebackers available each year in free agency, few fit the requirements of the 3-4. You see guys 6'1 and 230 like Shawn Barber or Darrin Smith that are available. You don't see many players in the mode of a younger Levon Kirkland or Mat Millen available that are suited to playing inside in a 3-4. Yes, the Steelers run that system well. They seem to know what to look for in the draft and get quality players to replace those they lose in free agency. But most of the other teams that ran the 3-4 in recent years including I think Seattle under Erickson had dreadful results. Gibbs exposed the 3-4 as a defense you should attack head on and not try and attack wide. If your 3-4 doesn't have a legit nose tackle and inside linebackers who can really make plays, you are toast. And that is what happened when the 3-4 proliferated in the 1980's. Teams were running the system with average quality players up the middle of the defense and the Redskins took advantage of that to abuse them for 150+ yards rushing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Hmm... but the question is... could we have the personnel to play the 3-4? I think we certainly do in our linebacker corps. Now... Big Daddy has played DE in the 3-4. Yes, he ****ed about it back in the day. But then again, he was in Cincinatti. Was he just trying to get out of that hellhole? Who knows? Has anyone asked him how he feels about it now? Wynn would man the other end spot. Del Cowsette is apparently a decent backup NT. Soo... the question is... if/when we cut Coleman.... can Sammy Adams play the NT spot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Ralph, You're welcome. You'll be relieved to know that didn't come from New York City. Om & Die Hard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 We may see some 3-4 by us this year but not as a base-package. Does anyone know if Mr. Lewis uses mulitple formations ala Pettibon or tends to just line up and play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.