3-4 Defense next Season and Beyond?

[Rosemountian]

Most 3-4s on the High School and College level do not assign linemen 2 gaps and let the LBs run free. Most are still gap control defenses, 1 man - 1 gap.

 

[Seany]

Most 3-4s on the High School and College level do not assign linemen 2 gaps and let the LBs run free. Most are still gap control defenses, 1 man - 1 gap.

Welp, that's entirely up to one's own personal discretion, as in when you're the coach, team does what you say, and that's only part the joy of coaching.

I absolutely loved it, personally. It's like a giant game of chess played out live right before your eyes, and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, but always you fight and fight even when faced by a far superior opponent, and damn is that a rush indeed.

I'm no more than the absolute merest of novices at BEST, but I always preferred the classic 3-4 formation, as designed by Bud Wilkinson and later perfected by Buddy Ryan in the NFL ranks, with the burden of proof (IE stopping the run) lying foremost upon my three down linemen and then secondarily upon the mike LB's, and with the outside boys running freely to the QB, or hopefully so anyway. It didn't always work out as planned, but as they say, the best of plans....

Boiled down though to its very essence, it's extremely simple. You just have to do it, or freaking bust your balls trying. It's all about will and effort, and when that ain't enough, well then ya just tip your cap.

No matter what, it's an awesome topic. 4-3 vs. 3-4, which is better and which is preferred? I love football so much, I could go on and on and on about this topic all night and probably for days on end, but enough's enough for tonight at least. I fear I'm boring enough as is.

I really enjoyed that article though, and am glad to see actual X's and O's football talk returned to this forum.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Extremely poor is more like it. Homeless man's Devin Hester? Probably.

BLITZ! BLITZ! BLITZ! Defend a slant. Tackle somebody. Quit missing tackles!

So your biggest beef with his statement is that you would have replaced "very" with "extremely"? I think you got the point.

I also hope that you aren't implying that Hester was a good Dback in college, especially at tackling...

 

[GreasyGopher]

Extremely poor is more like it. Homeless man's Devin Hester? Probably.

BLITZ! BLITZ! BLITZ! Defend a slant. Tackle somebody. Quit missing tackles!

I think in the limited sample size Stoudemire has shown that he enjoys the physicality of playing defense. His tackling will improve with practice.

Can we stop blaming the corners for lining up so far off the ball? They're lining up where they are told to line up. Playing the corners deep is a scheme flaw not player error.

 

[Rosemountian]

I think in the limited sample size Stoudemire has shown that he enjoys the physicality of playing defense. His tackling will improve with practice.

Can we stop blaming the corners for lining up so far off the ball? They're lining up where they are told to line up. Playing the corners deep is a scheme flaw not player error.

Playing corners deep is not a scheme flaw if you don't have the people (in the secondary or on the front 7 for pressure) to play them up close.
It is a roster flaw more than anything.

 

[GreasyGopher]

So your saying that the corners being played in the endzone when the opponent is on the 10 yardline is because they are unable to cover? Or when the corners are playing 12 yards off and the opponent only needs 8 yards for a first? That's a roster flaw? Cosgrove plays a very soft brand of defense and this is an example.

I'm not saying play bump and run but at least defend the down and distance.

 

[Seany]

You play your corners deep because the perception is you have to, in other words when you see no other alternative. It's a situation of last resort and sort of giving up and saying "Well there's no other alternative BUT to play them deep" , and that's obviously a situation you'd like to avoid if at all possible, and the remedy is of course to generate a pass rush so that you don't need to leave that secondary hanging in an impossible situation like that.

It's similar to a 'prevent' defense, which as we know pretty much prevents nothing beyond moving the ball for big chunks of yardage and ultimately giving up the score you were trying to prevent in the first place.

 

[Rosemountian]

So your saying that the corners being played in the endzone when the opponent is on the 10 yardline is because they are unable to cover? Or when the corners are playing 12 yards off and the opponent only needs 8 yards for a first? That's a roster flaw? Cosgrove plays a very soft brand of defense and this is an example.

I'm not saying play bump and run but at least defend the down and distance.

You said scheme flaw. I said roster flaw.

What you meant is you prefer a different scheme, not a scheme flaw. Look around the country, there are tons of teams that play soft zone and soft man, even in the redzone. I don't always like it, but when you don't have the people, it is the safest defense to run.

Withers tried to run the style you want, and it was the worst defense in gopher history (and it even had an NFL draft pick playing safety).

You could bring in Kirby Smart from Alabama, and either he would probably be playing soft corners with this roster, or he would be giving up 500 yards per game.

 

[GreasyGopher]

You play your corners deep because the perception is you have to, in other words when you see no other alternative. It's a situation of last resort and sort of giving up and saying "Well there's no other alternative BUT to play them deep" , and that's obviously a situation you'd like to avoid if at all possible, and the remedy is of course to generate a pass rush so that you don't need to leave that secondary hanging in an impossible situation like that.

It's similar to a 'prevent' defense, which as we know pretty much prevents nothing beyond moving the ball for big chunks of yardage and ultimately giving up the score you were trying to prevent in the first place.

I agree but shouldn't this be based on personnel. Its appears to me that playing soft is a part of Cosgrove's defensive scheme. Which in turn would make it a scheme flaw and not a roster flaw.

Edit: Again, I'm not saying play the corners on the line and press the receiver. All I'm saying is when the situation calls for it play closer to the line. If 8 yards are needed for a first or whatever play 7-8 yards off the ball. At least put yourself in position to make a play. Or maybe I'm just getting caught up with the corners and the real problem is that the linebackers aren't getting their depth quickly enough to stop the slants.

 

[Seany]

I agree but shouldn't this be based on personnel. Its appears to me that playing soft is a part of Cosgrove's defensive scheme. Which in turn would make it a scheme flaw and not a roster flaw.

I have no idea, man. I don't know whether he's trying to fit player to scheme or scheme to player, and there's a huge difference between the two. Ideally the situation is to mold your players to whatever scheme you wish to run, and it is highly possible (of course dependent upon circumstance) to do so, but I won't even pretend to know what Cosgrove has attempted. That would be totally unfair, because I have no idea what he sees in practices. I do know that he is trying and is obviously doing what he sees as best, so I have to trust him on that. What else is there to do?

He knows his players far better than me, you, or any one of us ever will, so you have to give him that, and also give him the fact that he's trying his damndest to succeed as best he possibly can. What I do see as an armchair QB sitting at home and watching the team on TV is their absolute inability to generate any kind of pressure on the QB at all, and that's so blatantly obvious, and how that utter lack of pass rush hamstrings him terribly.

I think he's obviously just trying to do the best with what he's got, and as a defensive coordinator, it's a rough lot he's drawn. That's not in defense of him, as his defense has been for the most part just plain sad, but it's reality. You play with what you're given, and do the best you possibly can with that, and that's all anyone can do.

I know I'm ready for a change though, as all us do. It's time, and we all deserve much, much better than this.

 

[GreasyGopher]

Let's just hope whatever the future brings that the new coaches are able to get the defense to consistently make plays whether it's 3-4, 4-3, 3-3-5, 46 or anything else.

 

[Seany]

Let's just hope whatever the future brings that the new coaches are able to get the defense to consistently make plays whether it's 3-4, 4-3, 3-3-5, 46 or anything else.

I hope so too. We all do. And in my opinion as a total football wonk, this has been the best thread here in ages, so thank you all for that, and thank you Doogie for the thoughtful article begging this discussion. Great stuff, and thank you again for that.