Panthers/Falcons game day thread~

the misconception of the 3-4

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_1920_The_4-3_vs._the_3-4.html

Despite a large disparity in team success, the differences between the defenses statistically is lower than Eli Manning's passer rating. While the 3-4 holds a slight edge in almost all of the major defensive categories, the biggest separation is in red zone defense where the 4-3 holds a marginal edge in terms of touchdowns allowed.

In fact, the two defenses are almost identical in points per game, yards per play, rush yards per game and turnovers per game. Behind Pittsburgh's reputation as a run-stuffing defense which is known for blitzing the quarterback it is often assumed the 3-4 defense tallies more sacks and less rushing yards. With rush yards per game separated by a tenth of a yard and sacks by two tenths there could not be a larger misconception.
In fact the Seahawks, a team which has not used the 3-4 defense primarily since 1989, have ranked in the top six in the league in sacks each of the past three seasons including leading the league in 2005.

 

man you fucking suck. why you gotta whine so much, pussy?

 

http://www.active.com/football/Articles/Which_Defense_Is_Best_for_Your_Football_Team_.htm

The 4-3
The 4-3 is the most commonly used defense at the upper levels, including the NFL. At lower levels the 4-3 is not particularly popular because many coaches consider it weak against the run due to the fact there are only four down linemen. At the higher levels, the quality and size of the average down linemen makes this a non factor. In essence, if a team possesses the size, strength, and quickness necessary to run the 4-3 defense, it is a formidable defensive formation.

Besides the ever-present four down linemen (2 tackles and 2 ends), there are three linebackers--two to the inside and one at the outside shoulder of the tight end. Two cornerbacks and two safeties are the standard. Equally effective against most all offensive formations, the 4-3 is the default defense of choice for this author. It is easily modified for various offensive sets. The third linebacker (on the tight end) can cover the tight end, blitz, or cover any of the short zones to that side or the hook zone over the middle. The cornerbacks can blitz with the safety(s) assuming the corner's responsibilities. Or a corner can drop back in deep coverage allowing a safety blitz.

Because of its high flexibility, an offense will find it difficult to isolate a particular area or defensive player. If the 4-3 has a weakness, it is that the inside linebackers are the primary tacklers for runs between the tackles and they are of course four to five yards off the ball.

The 3-4
The 3-4 is designed to stop the short passing, ball control type offense. Naturally less than ideal against the run due to only three down linemen, this defense offers an extra defensive back for pass coverage.

Consisting of a nose guard and two other down linemen, the coach has the task of deciding who the outside two linemen are--ends or tackles. Often one of the linebackers has zone pass coverage responsibilities, in effect employing five defensive backs. This is why the 3-4 is often referred to as the "nickel" defense. Having five defensive backs allows for random blitzing by one or more of these backs in order to maintain a sufficient pass rush. The 3-4 is susceptible to the inside run and is used primarily is situations where an interior run is not expected.

sorry purrsy but Again, no one agrees with you

 

Lol, I know, right?




edit- Run defense is all about gap control. That's why in a 43 it's so important to have a fast, physical mike. He's responsible for multiple gaps and reads. He keys off the RB even when it's a pass play.

The 34 can certainly employ multiple down linemen at any given play. But as a standard, if you have only 3 down linemen, and they need to be good, because in a 34 the linemen are responsible for 2 gaps as well- certainly the NT- you're going to have the chance of a run that can go for 1 yard turn into 2. It's not a huge difference. But your LINEBACKERS, not defensive linemen, are responsible for taking on more blocks from OL...not just typically the FBs and TEs.

Blah.

I mean, fact is fact. I'm not sweating it because someone tells me I'm wrong and no one likes me. I couldn't care less who likes me.

 

Blow me.

 

Yeah, let's hold up active.com as being more accurate than NFL sites. Jesus Christ, Purr. When HeadCase is the only person backing you up, that's proof itself that you're looking like an idiot. Again, it's common fucking knowledge that the 3-4 is a better run defense. Pitch posted several links, and others also pointed out that the stats show this every season. Every single season, 4-3 defenses give up more average rushing yards than 3-4 defenses. Every season. You said something unconscionably stupid, and have just made things worse because you're too much of a coward to admit when you fuck up.

 

Ya know what? I'm not even kidding when I say I still love ya.

You're my guy. I'm moving on. If you can ever prove me wrong, I will be happy to say so.

 

So quite obviously, people have already proven you wrong, but you lack the courage to admit your mistake. And just to reiterate, it was an idiotic mistake since any casual fan should know that the 3-4 is considered a better run defense. The stats back that up year after year after year, but you can't admit that you were wrong because you're a coward. And again, people don't avoid asking for your opinion because you're not around that much. They don't ask because everyone here thinks you're a dumbass.

 

Johnson shouldn't drop a ton, but we have done so to some solid results; he's a solid pursuit player but he's not the top flight athlete in space so as a backside run linebacker it's hard to say. As a rusher, he doesn't lose anything standing, and he's playing leverage contain rush one way or another.
It's good enough. You wouldn't pick him out to be a 3-4 OLB necessarily, and if we had enough good outside rushers it'd be interesting to see him play the five technique more, but he does seem to work there.


Coples could fit the 3-4, I guess. He's definitely more a 4-3 left end, in a one-gap 3-4 he could play end, though. Two gap? That's a lot to ask of anyone who's played outside, and beefing him up would not be to his advantage IMO (in that ideally you'd like 20 on him for two-gap) and it takes away some of his better traits.


Either way, getting way ahead of yourself if the question is leading towards "should we pick Coples to fit our new defense?", since it's just a portion of our defense that we'll use anyway.

 

wait, how'd this become the 3-4 thread?