forums

No more 3-4

DuffleBagYoda

DuffleBagYoda

TBayCane RELOADED
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
2,013
Chip,Chuck,Chud,RichRod...
All have had teams fond of this base scheme....

Rich Rod is slightly modified to a 335...

My ONLY objection to a 3 man front in college is that it is hard to find dominant DL let alone between 18 and 22

and depending what U ask them to do it could make the elite guys pass on us
 
Advertisement
Don't disregard 34 defense because we had con men trying to run it.. Also there are many types of 34 defenses too.. There are some 1 gap attacking style also..

I think chip ran that style while at UO but could be wrong.. Either way, hire a real coach is all that matters everything else will fall into place
 
Im fully aware...
I just didn't feel like making another novel post about the differences...

In theory I personally really like the 34.
But it is more specialized in its roles for front 7. That's why it is hard to run in the pros WITH the benefit of Free agency. So i believe it is even more of a challenge in college.

A 43 is easier to plug and play because the demands on the positions aren't as specific... And it is simpler in nature.

The 34 is complex to solve but can be just as complex to teach/learn
 
U are right about the lining up vs assignments. I mean Elite DTs and DEs that want to go pro may hear 34 and get tentative

However you want to slice it the DL need to be bigger in a 34
 
4-3 Over and only the 4-3 Over.

This isn't negotiable.

If a candidate isn't willing to run it, that's a rebuttable presumption of homosex. I don't want to hear it.

There are enough variations in the front to handle anything. You can move the 1 tech to 2 if weak ISO is a problem, or justhave Will take C and DE take B instead. Same thing on stronside, if strong uso is a problem, have 9 and Sam exchange gaps. The front can handle everything. Just get upfield, recruit fast ends, no more than 245 at the 5 and 260 at the 9. Only true LB is the Mike who has to bang around with the FB in the strong A and weak B gaps. OLBs are speed demons and converted HS safeties. 215 pound will, 225-230 Sam. Put Norton at 3 as he is the disruptor and Jenkins the 1.

Fill N Spill and chase it down. I don't want to hear about anything else. The defense worked for 25 ******* years, it wasn't the problem. It was that Randy got lazy in recruiting.

What happened the last 5 years to the defense was a disaster of biblical proportions. I don't want new ideas or any of that bull****. That's what we were sold on and we had grown men playing pattycake like ******s. Read what? Get the **** upfield in your gap. If they block down, you step down, that's it.

I don't want to hear about 3-3-5 or "attacking" 3-4 or any of that garbage.
 
DJWilliams55 said:
4-3 Over and only the 4-3 Over.

This isn't negotiable.

If a candidate isn't willing to run it, that's a rebuttable presumption of homosex. I don't want to hear it.

There are enough variations in the front to handle anything. You can move the 1 tech to 2 if weak ISO is a problem, or justhave Will take C and DE take B instead. Same thing on stronside, if strong uso is a problem, have 9 and Sam exchange gaps. The front can handle everything. Just get upfield, recruit fast ends, no more than 245 at the 5 and 260 at the 9. Only true LB is the Mike who has to bang around with the FB in the strong A and weak B gaps. OLBs are speed demons and converted HS safeties. 215 pound will, 225-230 Sam. Put Norton at 3 as he is the disruptor and Jenkins the 1.

Fill N Spill and chase it down. I don't want to hear about anything else. The defense worked for 25 ****ing years, it wasn't the problem. It was that Randy got lazy in recruiting.

What happened the last 5 years to the defense was a disaster of biblical proportions. I don't want new ideas or any of that bull****. That's what we were sold on and we had grown men playing pattycake like ******s. Read what? Get the **** upfield in your gap. If they block down, you step down, that's it.

I don't want to hear about 3-3-5 or "attacking" 3-4 or any of that garbage.
Click to expand...

Im wit U on that over front...
Plug n Play
 
The 3-4, geographically, can't be run at um" Just stop it. Its not a good defense for this region.

4-3 or 4-2-5. PERIOD.
 
Advertisement
No need for a 425 when your backers can fly...

Like the old Miami D

All we gotta Do is stock to the script... The JJ way
 
tbaycane said:
Im fully aware...
I just didn't feel like making another novel post about the differences...

In theory I personally really like the 34.
But it is more specialized in its roles for front 7. That's why it is hard to run in the pros WITH the benefit of Free agency. So i believe it is even more of a challenge in college.

A 43 is easier to plug and play because the demands on the positions aren't as specific... And it is simpler in nature.

The 34 is complex to solve but can be just as complex to teach/learn
Click to expand...

Amen. That is why even Saban is vulnerable to the uptempo. Our old 4-3 is better suited for any of today's offenses and only we have the amount of local talent to properly run it.
 
skyman said:
Don't disregard 34 defense because we had con men trying to run it.. Also there are many types of 34 defenses too.. There are some 1 gap attacking style also..

I think chip ran that style while at UO but could be wrong.. Either way, hire a real coach is all that matters everything else will fall into place
Click to expand...

I don't think the OP is disregarding it as far as scheme goes. A 3-4 can be really useful if used right. An aggressive 3-4 with disguising your blitz scheme could cause a lot of havoc. But given what was said, it's really hard to find the linemen for that scheme. If you keep it 1-gap, then you're straight. But 2-gap....you run into the **** we have these last 5 seasons.
 
tbaycane said:
No need for a 425 when your backers can fly...

Like the old Miami D

All we gotta Do is stock to the script... The JJ way
Click to expand...

You're if your base 4-3 you're running 4-2-5 against the spread. You still can keep 6 in the umbrella and run quarters, halves, under and combos.
 
Advertisement
tbaycane said:
No need for a 425 when your backers can fly...

Like the old Miami D

All we gotta Do is stock to the script... The JJ way
Click to expand...

I'm a 3-4 guy myself (with some 4-2-5 sprinkled in) but I don't want any 3-4 stuff at Miami.

I would say 4-2-5, but just like you mentioned, it's not really necessary when your Sam Linebacker can fly. I think, more than anything, we have to get back to our old way of recruiting. No more nit-picking about 10 pounds on our Linebackers, just recruit ball players. I want the Skai Moores, Adrienne Talans and James Burgess'.
 
Last edited:
Pentagon Cane said:
tbaycane said:
No need for a 425 when your backers can fly...

Like the old Miami D

All we gotta Do is stock to the script... The JJ way
Click to expand...

You're if your base 4-3 you're running 4-2-5 against the spread. You still can keep 6 in the umbrella and run quarters, halves, under and combos.
Click to expand...

Yes, the whip linebacker(jermain grace) ends up becoming your fifth Db..

Thats what makes that defense so great at miami... Because you can get those hybrid fast/physical backers like grace, in florida.

Dantonio had the defense down packed with

Denicos allen:whip... Darquez dennard: corner... trae waynes: corner Kurtis Drummond( Safety


grace: whip.... Corn El: corner... Artie: corner... Deon Bush: safety..


Could you imagine what dantonio or Foster could do with that alone?
 
I guess you people haven't watched the Denver Broncos lately.

Like the same morons who think "the spread" is an offense.

I prefer a 4-3, but there is nothing inherently wrong with running a 3-4, as long as it's of the single-gap variety.
 
Even a one gap 3 4 requires bigger lineman

And requires MORE players with SPECIFIC skillets
 
Last edited:
Back
Top