3-4 Defense

[Ich bein ein Berliner]

Both the Cowboys and the Giants are flirting with it. Probably trying to bring the heat on McNabb and throw of his rhythm.

Except for the Falcons, its been mostly used in the AFC lately. Wonder how it will fair in the NFC East.

[Lyion]

Don't the Pats run a lot of this?

I personally think the 4-3 is a better scheme, but it depends on the players I guess.

I think Buffalo runs some 3-4. as well as Pitt.

I don't think the Eagles will be a threat this year. They lost both starting CBs and their offense is overrated. Plus, with Gibbs and Coughlin in the division it'll be much more competitive.

[Mop]

I think the 3-4 is only effective when you have 4 quality line backers and a very good nose guard that can take getting crushed.

I think you can do alot with a solid 3/4 though to confuse good quarterbacks

[Xaiveir]

It does depend on the players, but more importantly it depends on who you are playing. If you are playing a predominent Pass first, run second team, the 3-4 is a perfect scheme. With only 3 down lineman and the ability to drop 8 people back into pass coverage, it can give quarterbacks fits (especially QBs that enjoy scrambling /wave Mcnabb).

The 3-4 Defense is also primarily used in passing downs, its full of deception, fronts, dogs, stunts and many differnt blitzes, goal line options and coverages. It is probably the most flexible defense in terms of possibilities. A predominatly Run orientated offense however should see lots of success against a 3-4 defense simply because of the 3 down lineman, and dropping more people back into coverage.

Now with the multitude of blitzes that can come out of the 3-4, you will see more plays for negative or no yardage. However, the 3-4 defense will give up more big yardage plays as well. This is why most teams go with the 4-3 defense, its alittle more consistent.

With the right players, a 3-4 defense can be VERY dominate.

As far as how it will work in the NFC east, i think it will be very effective. The only teams it will have trouble against in the NFC is Washington and Dallas imho. Reason being Clinton Portis and Eddie George, the other 2 teams do NOT have a dominant running back.

That being said, i still think (as much as it kills me to say this) is that philly is still the favorite to represent that division in the playoffs.

Xaiveir Tanthalas :roll:
Forest Stalker of the Nameless

[Ich bein ein Berliner]

The Pats run a kind of modified 3-4.

Actually, what Dallas is looking at running is a modified 3-4 too (they pull an agile defensive end back off the line instead of using a fourth linebacker). Bill Parcels used to run a 3-4 back in his days at Texas Tech, and some of his protege's are still running the Pats defense.

The Steelers, Ravens, and Pats have been the best at the 3-4 recently. The Texans and the Falcons have been trying, with less effect.

Mop, that nose guard has to take one hell of beating. Personally, thats where I think the 3-4 is weak. A smash-mouth running back, constantly running off-tackle will wear it down. But a good 3-4 would work wonders I think against guys like McNabb and Michael Vick (kind of ironic, considering the Falcons run the 3-4 sometimes).

[Harrison]

I prefer the 3-4 defense. (pats fan)

But as stated it almost REQUIRES the right players. You need good linebackers period. And 3 linemen who are brick walls of pure own.

I played OLB in highschool, most fun Ive ever had was blitzing and sacking their PoS QB. (any team)
And there is a serious advantage to that with a 3-4 defense.

I dont like pass coverage, I sucked at it compared to most. Only made 3-4 interceptions, and a handful of foiled passes were of my doing. (in my zone) So if you can have some quick agile linebackers on a 3-4 youll be a force to reckon with as a team on defense.

[Malluas]

3-4 needs damn good Linebackers. Such as Ray Lewis in Baltimore. The
linemen just have to take up blockers so the LBs run and kill the QB.

4-3 is the opposite in the sense that your pressure comes from Linemen and the linebackers when blitzing opens up wholes for Linemen. Linebackers in 4-3 seem to be more involved in coverages.

Granted every one of those systems is run differently. Some us the 4-3 like a 3-4 and the other way aaround

[Abadon Kolazonta]

Buffalo uses the 4-3 alot more then the 3-4 with Pat, and Sam in front and Aaron and they just picked up Keith McKenzie for the other side this year

[Phlegm]

The Steelers have been playing the 3-4 defense forever since the linebackers always been their most dominant group on the defense. With all the stunts by their down linemen and the blitz by the linebackers, there are not many holes that the backs can run through. Their run defense are usually in the top ten year in and year out. So in saying the 3-4 is not good against the run is not correct.

The Steelers downfall recently has been their pass defense. They have the worst dbs ... alway get burned for long passes. I think 3-4 needs great linebackers and somewhat decent dbs for it to work.

[Xaiveir]

Who said the 3-4 was not a good run defense?


Xaiveir Tanthalas 8)
Forest Stalker of the Nameless

[Phlegm]

A predominatly Run orientated offense however should see lots of success against a 3-4 defense simply because of the 3 down lineman, and dropping more people back into coverage.


As far as how it will work in the NFC east, i think it will be very effective. The only teams it will have trouble against in the NFC is Washington and Dallas imho. Reason being Clinton Portis and Eddie George, the other 2 teams do NOT have a dominant running back.

[Minrott]

3-4 can be effective against the run but it is inherently flawed as a "run stopping" defense. No matter how spectacular of a linebacking corp you have, they're still 2-4 yards off the line of scrimmage. Now, maybe that's not enough room for a running back to break anything by himself, and possibly a great lineback can read the play, anticipate the count, and get to the line of scrimmage at the same time as the running back. However, because there are only 3 linemen down, it leaves at least 2 offensive linemen free to move downfield and block.

Using the 3-4 predominantly against the run will get you a lot of stops for 0-3 gains, but also a higher percentage of breakaways up the middle if the offensive line being played has mobile blockers. Good outside linebackers will keep containment because the OT's will be tied up, and that's a long way for a guard to pull and get there first.

[Anonymous]

as mop said, the nt has to be a mammoth tank ass to hold up in the middle against consistent double team and chip shots from guards on their way to the linebackers.

i would throw out there that the key players in an effective 3-4 are the defensive ends. they have to be big beefy fellows who can anchor the line and generate pressure with all those faggot twists and stunts. a tweener backer/de can get by playing the edge on a 4 man front, but on 3 man front, that young lad will get gypped on a consistent basis.

how to smack around a 3-4 alignment like a two dollar mexican hooker? double te set. all kinds of cheap bitch angles to smack down those defensive lineman and the edge rushers get forced wider to rush the pocket. think old school 'skins counter tre action.

[Minrott]

Counter tre. That's awesome haha. We used to do that shit in highschool.

[Lyion]

as mop said, the nt has to be a mammoth tank ass to hold up in the middle against consistent double team and chip shots from guards on their way to the linebackers.

Or have big linebackers, like Pitt does and utilize the zone blitz properly.

[Xaiveir]

I never said it wasnt a good run stopping defense. What i said was that a prodiminate run offense SHOULD (Note the word SHOULD) find success against the 3-4 defense.

That part all depends on how good of a defense you have. Now further i even went on to say that the 3-4 COULD be a very dominate offense, but again with the right people.

Now having marquee backs with a good offensive line (like those 2 teams mentioned) they will find success against MOST 3-4 defenses. Again not all.

Now again....ill pose the question. Who said that the 3-4 was not a great run defense? Wasnt me, i just came up with a generalization. That the 3-4 defense is PRIMARILY not a good run stopping D. Why the hell do you think most teams dont run it? Because the 4-3 is more effective at stopping the run, and its more consistent.

So i will reiterate it one more time. With the right core people, a 3-4 deffense CAN BE VERY DOMINATING. However very very very few teams actually run a true 3-4, and find success running that and only that.

Xaiveir Tanthalas 8)
Forest Stalker of the Nameless

[Lyion]

I never said it wasnt a good run stopping defense. What i said was that a prodiminate run offense SHOULD (Note the word SHOULD) find success against the 3-4 defense.

A good run offense should find success against any D. That said, the 3-4 played well with fast LBs seems more effective against the run.