Will a defense other than 4-3-4 work in the Big10?

Donate To GopherHole
G

GopherGack

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
193
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Many threads have been focusing on the need to move to an offense that uses a less conventional offense and everyone has their flavor they prefer; Triple option, Spread Option, Air Raid, etc. My question is should we be exploring other defensive philosophies? All teams run a base defense that they spend the vast majority of their time in. Should the Gophers be looking at alternatives to the 4-3? What are the advantages of the 4-2-5, 5-2-4, 33 stack, 3-4-4, etc...? Please post any good links to websites with good data or details of how they are run, what their advantages and disadvantages are. I would like to learn more!
 

It really all depends on your personnel. If you don't have 3-4 guys or whatever you shouldn't run it. Any offense or defense can work.
 

My understanding was that the U doesn't want to have other home games on the same day as a home football game because of parking and traffic. And football is at the mercy of TV schedules. But I think it would be managable to have a VB game an hour to 90 minutes after the FB game. That would give time for the football crowd to disperse, leaving parking for the VB fans. And of course there would be a number of football fans who decided to check out a VB game.
 

I am not trolling here RodentRampage so I have no idea why you gave that response. I am trying to learn about other potential defenses and why they would or would not be good fits in the Big10. In other threads people have hinted at the potential of other offenses to help in areas of recruiting and the "uniqueness" factor that helps to win football games. I am simply wondering if defenses would have the same benefits. So again I'll ask:

Are there other defenses that would work as a base defense in the Big10. Why or why not?
 

GopherGack said:
Many threads have been focusing on the need to move to an offense that uses a less conventional offense and everyone has their flavor they prefer; Triple option, Spread Option, Air Raid, etc. My question is should we be exploring other defensive philosophies? All teams run a base defense that they spend the vast majority of their time in. Should the Gophers be looking at alternatives to the 4-3? What are the advantages of the 4-2-5, 5-2-4, 33 stack, 3-4-4, etc...? Please post any good links to websites with good data or details of how they are run, what their advantages and disadvantages are. I would like to learn more!
Click to expand...

Now I understand your question.
Yes, we should be exploring other defensive philosophies. I just don't know that any of the currently discussed candidates fit that bill. I can think of Golden, Frazier, Pellini, and Kirby Smart as possible candidates from the defensive side of the ball (I'm sure there are more). I don't think of any of them as innovators, but more as solid football coaches. There may be some differences in schemes from what is normally done in the Big Ten, but it wouldn't be as drastic as bringing in Leach to coach the offense.
If there is a defensive co-ordinator out there who is running a 5-2-4 and absolutely destroying people, I'm all for it. I just don't know if that person is currently out there.
I would be very happy with any of the 4 coaches I listed earlier. However, I like our chances with Leach the best, as you already know.
 


GopherGack said:
Many threads have been focusing on the need to move to an offense that uses a less conventional offense and everyone has their flavor they prefer; Triple option, Spread Option, Air Raid, etc. My question is should we be exploring other defensive philosophies? All teams run a base defense that they spend the vast majority of their time in. Should the Gophers be looking at alternatives to the 4-3? What are the advantages of the 4-2-5, 5-2-4, 33 stack, 3-4-4, etc...? Please post any good links to websites with good data or details of how they are run, what their advantages and disadvantages are. I would like to learn more!
Click to expand...

MV has written some columns, suggesting that with the Gophers depth at LB, and with the kid of D-Linemen that are on the squad, that the Gophers were moving toward a shift to a 3-4 scheme. It could be a good idea and it will all depend on the coaching staff and personnel.
 

The reason I'd support a move to a 3-4, or some other more aggressive defensive philosophy in the traditional 4-3 around these parts, is the same reason I'm getting more behind the idea of Leach at coach for offense: We're not going to out-WI/IA/OSU the power schools, so we have to position differently. A 3-4 would be more difficult for WI/IA linemen to know their assignments, and if we can create some uncertainty there, then we don't have to and go fatty on fatty with their much better fatties.
 

MSU is working in more and more 3-4 to take advantage of our insane LB talent/depth. Our base is still 4-3 but we're using more 3-4 as the season goes on. I think our base will always be a 4-3 though, coaches just like having something else to throw at teams. I think either would work as a base if you have the talent for it. I just don't think the 3-3-5 like Michigan runs will be effective in the long run in the bigten.
 

Whatever we run, I hope we experiment more with tackling. Seems like it's very effective when other teams do it. The whole "lunge-and-bounce-off" thing isn't working too well.
 



I posted a specific request for an odd front in another thread, so I'll bring it here. Michigan runs an odd front in the Big Ten and is terrible defensively. Stanford in a notorious offense happy league runs an odd front and is successful. (I'm still kind of looking into this, so just finding random examples).

I think the comments in the other thread that a 3-3-5 stack would be hard to implement since one of its weaknesses is inside power running teams. I still imagine that the 4-3 base defense with variations to bring safety down to a 4-4 look is probably best for stopping the run. However, everyone is recruiting the same type of kids to fill these roles. Can we extract out tweener DE's or bulk up 4-4 linebackers at the high school level to play in a 3-4?
 

Whatever you think, people, but an 11-0 defense will work because no one on offense will know who is rushing and who is dropping.
 

monk10 said:
I posted a specific request for an odd front in another thread, so I'll bring it here. Michigan runs an odd front in the Big Ten and is terrible defensively. Stanford in a notorious offense happy league runs an odd front and is successful. (I'm still kind of looking into this, so just finding random examples).

I think the comments in the other thread that a 3-3-5 stack would be hard to implement since one of its weaknesses is inside power running teams. I still imagine that the 4-3 base defense with variations to bring safety down to a 4-4 look is probably best for stopping the run. However, everyone is recruiting the same type of kids to fill these roles. Can we extract out tweener DE's or bulk up 4-4 linebackers at the high school level to play in a 3-4?
Click to expand...

A 3-3-5 requires a lot of speed and a stud safety and can easily be exposed by good running teams. Most of these kids know the 4-3 and it is easier to teach in college with the limited time. I would have no problem moving to a 3-4 but right now we don't even have 3 decent LBs.
 

I'd assume we would recruit to the skill sets we desired. Unfortunately we could argue that we don't have enough d-line to run a 4-3 either.
 



2 lock down corners, run a 5-4 "monster"...dyynooomite!!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom