3-4 question, is this just a crazy talk?

[FullyERicht]

How many times does it need to be said that a 50 front is five defensive lineman and either 2 or 3 LBs???

Jesus ****ing Christ that picture is three DL and 4 LBs, WHICH IS OUR BASE DEFENSE.

Having 5 guys on/near the LOS DOESNT MAKE IT A 50 DEFENSE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

You have no ****ing clue what you're talking about, when it comes to a 50... N O N E!!! The OLB'ers come up as a hybrid or AKA: Rush End! Heard those terms before? You should've! A 50 is a NT, 2 DT's & 2 Hybrid / Rush Ends. You do not play a 50 with 5 down lineman. Good Lord!!!

LMFAO. So you watched a youtube video of some random high school coordinator who improperly calls his OLBs "ends" and you are now the expert on the 50 front.

The 50 front defense is a NT, two DTs, and two DE's. The 3-4 two gap defense is a NT, two DTs (DEs), and two hybrid OLBs. It is a critical distinction that you are repeatedly failing to comprehend.

Shayon Green in our base Defense is AN OUTSIDE LINEBACKER. He is not a DE. He does not put his hand in the ground. And he often has pass coverage responsibility.

In fact I can't think of a college and certainly not a pro team in the last 25 years that has used a 5-2 monster or similar. It's an extinct form of defense that is only used in youth through HS football.

When Miami plays a 4-3, they either play the over front, OR the 5 man Under front. When we play a 3-4, we play an Okie front. None of those things is the monster. The last time I have even watched a monster defense was in 1984, when JJ was still using the D that howard used, only to finally play HIS defense the next year and thus the Miami 4-3 was created.

I can't even begin to describe how stupid you sound. An Okie front with two OLBs IS NOT A 50 DEFENSE.

 

[Cash]

Ok sure if you feel better about yourself I'm done arguing with you...

 

[FullyERicht]

This is the "Eagle" defense Cash keeps spouting nonsense about.

 

[FullyERicht]

And THIS is what our base defense is. As you can see, the OLBs are not directly on the line, and their hands ARE NOT DOWN.

From that NY Times piece:

"The 3-4 gave coordinators the flexibility to blitz or drop into coverage without changing personnel. Versatile linebackers like Lawrence Taylor or Robert Brazile or Rickey Jackson or Ted Hendricks could rush the passer or drop into coverage effectively. Teams could disguise their blitzes and coverage easily and disrupt the timing and rhythm of the passing attacks that were gaining favor in the league. The outside linebackers could walk up to the line of scrimmage and create a five-man front of sorts to help contain the big, quick running backs of the day. Stars like O.J. Simpson or Franco Harris found it a little more difficult to get outside against the 3-4.

 

[bozcane]

And THIS is what our base defense is. As you can see, the OLBs are not directly on the line, and their hands ARE NOT DOWN.

From that NY Times piece:

"The 3-4 gave coordinators the flexibility to blitz or drop into coverage without changing personnel. Versatile linebackers like Lawrence Taylor or Robert Brazile or Rickey Jackson or Ted Hendricks could rush the passer or drop into coverage effectively. Teams could disguise their blitzes and coverage easily and disrupt the timing and rhythm of the passing attacks that were gaining favor in the league. The outside linebackers could walk up to the line of scrimmage and create a five-man front of sorts to help contain the big, quick running backs of the day. Stars like O.J. Simpson or Franco Harris found it a little more difficult to get outside against the 3-4.

OK - using this diagram to speak from, who's in it next year IYO, and how do we stop the crossing route stuff that killed us the last few games?

 

[FullyERicht]

And finally the 4-3 Under front that also seems to be so utterly confusing to Cash:

"With the Elephant rusher (weakside DE) in a two-point stance and the strongside linebacker usually near the line of scrimmage as another capable pass rushing option, these defenses look like a 5-2 or 3-4 front. "

 

[dg151]

Some people will call 3-4 1 gap stuff where both OLBs almost always rush a 50 front (Wade Phillips' D usually gets this label). Wouldn't really consider that something we run as our SLB isn't much of a rusher and will play in space a lot. No one plays the old 50 front where 5 guys have their hands down anymore.

 

[Cash]

There's no helping you bro! None! Why the **** you donyiu think we recruited a whole bunch rush ends? You think we were telling all these kids you'll play the rush end and then poof they're OLB'ers...

 

[FullyERicht]

And THIS is what our base defense is. As you can see, the OLBs are not directly on the line, and their hands ARE NOT DOWN.

From that NY Times piece:

"The 3-4 gave coordinators the flexibility to blitz or drop into coverage without changing personnel. Versatile linebackers like Lawrence Taylor or Robert Brazile or Rickey Jackson or Ted Hendricks could rush the passer or drop into coverage effectively. Teams could disguise their blitzes and coverage easily and disrupt the timing and rhythm of the passing attacks that were gaining favor in the league. The outside linebackers could walk up to the line of scrimmage and create a five-man front of sorts to help contain the big, quick running backs of the day. Stars like O.J. Simpson or Franco Harris found it a little more difficult to get outside against the 3-4.

OK - using this diagram to speak from, who's in it next year IYO, and how do we stop the crossing route stuff that killed us the last few games?

Well I think the entire point of what those such as WCD have said many times over is I STILL, in year 4, don't see a good fit for this defense with our personnel. Frankly, there are only three NFL teams in history that had success with it off the top of my head. The NY Giants from the mid 80s to early 90s was one (Parcells HC, Belichick DC, Groh LBs). The late 90s NY Jets (Parcells HC, Belichick DC, Groh LBs) . The early 2000s Pats was another (Belichick). It was mediocre in Dallas with Parcells sans Belichick, btw. And Belichicks defense have been shredded for a decade now that almost all teams pass a ton and spread the formations out.

I have never seen a team use the "true 3-4" as a base defense in college with any sustained success. Saban uses the concepts and elements of it but not as the base. And he was a 4-3 guy at LSU. Im not sure what Stanford uses but it's more 1 gap than I originally thought.

Frankly it's an arcane defense best suited for 21 base offenses that are one dimensional. Like the Florida Gators for example.

 

[FullyERicht]

There's no helping you bro! None! Why the **** you donyiu think we recruited a whole bunch rush ends? You think we were telling all these kids you'll play the rush end and then poof they're OLB'ers...

Actually that's exactly what they are doing.

In the 3-4, Quan is an OLB. In the 4-3, he is the "elephant". In the Over, he's a "rush end".

Thats the entire premise of "being multiple". There is no such thing as a "multiple 50 defense". Thats some random guy who doesn't understand terminology or history, naming his defense whatever he wants.

In the 3-4 front such as the photo you provided: Shayon Green and the SLB are OLB. McCord, AQM, Gilbert, all were OLBs in the base D. Sometimes they rush the passer, and sometimes, as is the case when everyone loses their mind over Shayon Green, they play pass coverage. He will never have his hand in the dirt from this front. Here is an example of what that might have looked like last year across the front 5:

SOLB Cornelius/McCord, heads up DE Pierre, heads up NT Porter, Heads up DE Chick, WOLB Green.

In the 4-3 Under front, the weakside OLB from the 3-4 front now becomes the "Elephant" or "Rush End". He may or may not have his hand in the dirt. It would have looked like this:

SOLB Cornelius, 5technique DE Pierre, 1 technique NT Renfrow, 3 technique Chickillo, WOLB Green.

In the 4-3 Over front, which is a subpackage we run ONLY on third and long, we played two of our WOLB/Elephants on the edge, and removed the Nose tackle. It would have looked like this:

SOLB Armbrister (no longer player on or near the LOS), AQM as a 9 tech DE, a 3 tech Luther Robinson, Chick as a 2i or 1 tech, and McCord as a 5 or ghost 9 WDE.

THIS is why they call our defense "hybrid". Guys play different positions and different roles depending on the front called, personnel, etc. It's why it takes forever to get kids up to speed. In Randy's system, AQM and McCord would be playing DE ONLY, and in a specific way (1 gap, half a man, block down step down, etc). Now? They have to be able to do all that PLUS play pass coverage, and run fits. Chickillo is asked to be a two gap, extend arms and shed DE, and then a single gap and hold DT. It's why development is slow going, and our kids are struggling SO bad.

 

[FullyERicht]

[video=youtube;twx2XaInhV0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twx2XaInhV0[/video]

The first TWO **** highlights is Green OLB, Pierre DE, Porter DE, Chick DE, Armbrister OLB IN A 3-4 OKIE FRONT two gapping.

At the 1:35 mark, you can see a 3rd down 4-3 under package of Chick at 3T, Luther at 1T, McCord at 5T, and AQM as the Elephant.

 

[M3N]

All in all: the defense is very complex, especially for college players. This defensive scheme does not belong here. Getting penetration is key.... Has been and always will be. We need to run the 43 and get up field

 

[FullyERicht]

If you watch the entire highlight video our defensive packages are evident:

Most common packages (most common to least common):
Base 3-4...SOLB Green, 4 tech DE Pierre, NT Porter, 4tech DE Chick, WOLB Armbrister. Three DL are two gap players.

Under 4-3 (long yardage and 3rd down). Mccord 7 tech, Luther 1 tech, Chick 3 tech, AQM Elephant in a ghost 9.

Over (pass)....Same guys as under, but with Chick and AQM on the strong side.

Over (run)....Green as the strong side 9, Pierre at 3, Porter at 1, and Chick at 5.

This is why we are "multiple".

 

[Cane Dynasty]

First off we typically do not run a standard 3-4 front. We more often then not run a 5 man front or 50 front. And to answer your question no in a 50 we do not 2 gap. We single gap and slant 50 eagle strong or weak depending on the look. Sometimes our 4- 3 isn't actually a 4-3. We like to bring up a OLB last second to the line. You have to look at the alignment of the NT. He's usually in either a 0 tech or shaded almost at a 1 tech. If we are lined up in a 4-3 then we're aligned in a 3 tech and 1 tech.

We do not run a 50 and never have

You went old school..lol

Oh snap! This is bout to get GOOD!

Told ya!

 

[Gatorhater]

"The 3-4 gave coordinators the flexibility to blitz or drop into coverage without changing personnel. Versatile linebackers like Lawrence Taylor or Robert Brazile or Rickey Jackson or Ted Hendricks could rush the passer or drop into coverage effectively. Teams could disguise their blitzes and coverage easily and disrupt the timing and rhythm of the passing attacks that were gaining favor in the league. The outside linebackers could walk up to the line of scrimmage and create a five-man front of sorts to help contain the big, quick running backs of the day. Stars like O.J. Simpson or Franco Harris found it a little more difficult to get outside against the 3-4."

Wow. LT, Brazile, Jackson, the friggin Stork? That is a list of all time best. Has anyone seen anything like one of those walking around Greentree lately, well except if Ted visits. Personally, I could care less if we play a 4-3, 3-4, 5-2, 9-2 or anything else. I want unrelenting pressure in the other team backfield. I want everyone in the that backfield who might have the ball or might get the ball tackled by someone. Not even Tom Brady is all pro when you put helmets on him. If you don't have enough speed you might get burned. Get enough speed.

 

[fivecent]

Goldenshowers it seems that no one runs what I have suggested, but do you think it makes any football sense. My thought process we might have two almost unblock-able guys in thomas and jackson in a few years along with guys who can command double teams and clog the middle in wyche, heurtelou and jenkins and Jack olb in smith and harris who might also be unstoppable. The nt has both A gaps, the de rush threw B gaps, playing the run on the way to qb and the olbs have the C gaps if need. The ilb and Safetys can fill in where needed. Could this work/ Would it allow for pressure, stopping the inside run and keeping 7 or 8 guys in coverage?

 

[FullyERicht]

Goldenshowers it seems that no one runs what I have suggested, but do you think it makes any football sense. My thought process we might have two almost unblock-able guys in thomas and jackson in a few years along with guys who can command double teams and clog the middle in wyche, heurtelou and jenkins and Jack olb in smith and harris who might also be unstoppable. The nt has both A gaps, the de rush threw B gaps, playing the run on the way to qb and the olbs have the C gaps if need. The ilb and Safetys can fill in where needed. Could this work/ Would it allow for pressure, stopping the inside run and keeping 7 or 8 guys in coverage?

Thomas and Jackson aren't interior guys. What you are describing is a variant of the bear front. SF and Seattle both use this.

In SFs case: Ahmad Brooks is a 9tech SOLB. the three interior DL play 3tech (strong B gap), NT (both A gaps), and 3tech (weak B). Then the WOLB (Aldon Smith) plays a wide 9.

I'm a huge fan of this D, but it requires three DTs playing. It is also very vulnerable to read option.

The biggest irony is that the way we have recruited is IDEAL for the 4-3 over slide.

 

[FullyERicht]

This is Seattle running what I described above.

Seattle jersey numbers make it easy to identify which players play what actual positions. DL are 90's. LBs are 50's. DBs are everything else. #91 is the "Leo" or "Elephant", mentioned earlier.

 

[fivecent]

Goldenshowers it seems that no one runs what I have suggested, but do you think it makes any football sense. My thought process we might have two almost unblock-able guys in thomas and jackson in a few years along with guys who can command double teams and clog the middle in wyche, heurtelou and jenkins and Jack olb in smith and harris who might also be unstoppable. The nt has both A gaps, the de rush threw B gaps, playing the run on the way to qb and the olbs have the C gaps if need. The ilb and Safetys can fill in where needed. Could this work/ Would it allow for pressure, stopping the inside run and keeping 7 or 8 guys in coverage?

Thomas and Jackson aren't interior guys. What you are describing is a variant of the bear front. SF and Seattle both use this.

In SFs case: Ahmad Brooks is a 9tech SOLB. the three interior DL play 3tech (strong B gap), NT (both A gaps), and 3tech (weak B). Then the WOLB (Aldon Smith) plays a wide 9.

I'm a huge fan of this D, but it requires three DTs playing. It is also very vulnerable to read option.

The biggest irony is that the way we have recruited is IDEAL for the 4-3 over slide.

Thank a lot. That's what I really wanted to know. Pictures and posts very informative.

 

[HurricaneVision]

FWIW, Golden is correct in most everything he's said.

In defense of Cash, several people call defense's by the wrong name because they are disguised so well they give off the illusion of a 50, or the function of the 5th man is so close to what a 'down' lineman does, but that is really just responsibility based on what the offense does.

We run a 3-4 base and two gap most of the time. We like to stunt our DL quite a bit and that has led to some massive holes- especially on the cutback. The responsibilities we put on the SOLB are pretty remarkable and that is quite simply both why Shayon Green played so much (he knew his responsibilities), and why he failed so much (didn't have the athleticism required to perform well in the role).

I've read a lot on here about wanting to run the old school 4-3 to put pressure on the offense at all times, but a 3-4 honestly can put even more pressure than the 4-3. If you change the responsibilities of the defense and what you ask of them, you can get pressure off the edge much quicker than out of the 4-3. The reason is in the ability to disguise who's coming and from where. The downside is the complexity and difficulty finding athletes who can handle all responsibilities.

The way we run the 3-4 is simply built differently and requires a ton of talent to be effective.