Belichick shares benefit of 3-4 two gap

[GonzoCane]

He's 100% correct. There is nothing wrong with this style of defense if you have the correct personnel.

My issue with it is that it is not suited for the type of defensive linemen usually found in South Florida and therefore makes it much more difficult to run at Miami.

South Florida is actually perfect. So many tweener types down here, Lbs, DEs and DBs. Finding interior DL is tough because either A. They want to get up field or B. Can't qualify(jokes)

And C. You need 3 of them to play, not 1. 350 lb. guys tend to wither in 90 degree heat and 90% humidity, particularly when the offense you're facing goes up-tempo. But they already know this, right?

 

[GonzoCane]

Personally, I still prefer an attacking, upfield defensive scheme regardless if it is based out of an odd or even front. The above article is interesting in that it highlights the advantage of safety coverages. I would assume this is mainly referring to split safety looks. However, typically in an even front a safety is used to balance out the numbers, particularly in the running game. All gaps are accounted for.

In the grand scheme of things I guess it ultimately boils down to whether or not Miami is able to consistently recruit an anchoring two gap defensive tackle or an athletic safety capable of playing down in the box while being equally effective in coverage. Based on the type of athletes we recruit in sFl, I think the odds are more favorable that we could find an Al Blades type of safety than a Vince Wilfork type of DT.

Let the upfront troops attack and reestablish the line of scrimmage while playing a lot of single high cover three and man 1. Just one mans opinion.

This.

 

[killa1storm]

He has a point but his comments on 1-gapping aren't necessarily true. In most of those 1-gap schemes they are slanting and stunting, so they're effectively 'moving' the gaps in which they have to defend. The whole point of 1-gapping is to keep your d-line and linebackers from having to take on extra blockers and run clean to the football.

Either defense can work obviously, but the 2-gap is more physically demanding. People mention coaches like Saban all the time but even they are in 4-3 and/or nickel a large majority of the time. Some of the best defensive coaches in the game (Carroll, Strong, Saban, Muschamp, etc.) have said its basically impossible to play 2-gap with college kids consistently. On occasion while mixing fronts? Sure, but not down to down. I remember Muschamp coming in the 11' season and trying to 2-gap with Easley and Floyd (2 future 1st rounders) and it bombed miserably. The defense didn't really take off until the following season when we ran 4-3, and 3-3-5 primarily and let those guys get upfield.

 

[The Franchise]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough.

When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

 

[Rd745]

Id think it's easier to find LBs down here who are fast and strong who can be responsible for two gaps versus DL who can two gap.

I don't care about the fact that Golden and D want to two gap. But the way they do it and the frequency they do it with is what bothers me

Sometimes they play defense as if we are playing a pro style team who runs it on first send second down all the time.

Teams are attacking through the air on every down but we have Tyriq out there covering a slot receiver because we are in base D worrying about the run

 

[NVA CANE]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough. When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

Good stuff right here

 

[CaneAlmighty]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough. When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

Good stuff right here

Here's the thing. I agree it takes a few years to get the right kids and develop them to the point where you can run the system. For the most part that's what we've witnessed here the last few seasons. Frustrating for sure.
But when the system gets established and you get to the point where you can play the stronger and mature players and let the young players develop and learn until it's their turn to step up it could be a thing of beauty.

 

[Ghandi]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough. When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

Good stuff right here

Here's the thing. I agree it takes a few years to get the right kids and develop them to the point where you can run the system. For the most part that's what we've witnessed here the last few seasons. Frustrating for sure.
But when the system gets established and you get to the point where you can play the stronger and mature players and let the young players develop and learn until it's their turn to step up it could be a thing of beauty.

I don't think you understand what he's trying to say at all.

You do not get the type of kids needed to run this scheme effectively year in and year out.

This is why it fails when a school runs it almost exclusively; which is what we've been doing.

You don't get kids like Hertelou (sp) and Wyche all of the time. More than likely, you'll get guys like Porter, Moore, and Pierre who are ineffective for that type of scheme at the collegiate level.

 

[skyman]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough. When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

Good stuff right here

Here's the thing. I agree it takes a few years to get the right kids and develop them to the point where you can run the system. For the most part that's what we've witnessed here the last few seasons. Frustrating for sure.
But when the system gets established and you get to the point where you can play the stronger and mature players and let the young players develop and learn until it's their turn to step up it could be a thing of beauty.

This is the issue right here, even with all the excuses and time put in, just by looking at these guys track record you can see they will sacrifice multiple seasons to have one decent season? Even you who have backed these guys arent even sure if they can get one dominate defense, nevertheless build a consistently strong defense year in year out. Randy even with his simplistic scheme which was figured out and abused from time to time put up consistent numbers even when the talent changed from year to year (I only bring him up because his scheme was the only other one we have run basically this century)

This is why I have issue with these guys, we have sacrificed 3 years of some bad defense, even historically bad and for what? Not even a guarantee of lockdown, you wont hear Golden or Dorito say, hey this year NO EXCUSES. We WILL get it done and if not its my fault. As much as I cannot stand the guy, go listen to Urban off of his 11-2 team, he held his defense accountable and said a mid 30s ranked defense is not accepted at OSU. MID 30s would be celebrated at UM! Golden would demand a raise for DORITO, sad man.

 

[HarryCarayisGoat]

"...If you play it well..."

I stopped right there.

 

[252cane]

I like wade phillips 3-4 he bases his on speed and attacking.

In dallas and houston he didnt have a big 330+ nt. He had 3 techniques playing nt in raitliff and mitchell.

Dallas had 3 3technique dts on the line and in houston he had 1 3 technique and 2 4-3 sde in watt and smith.

He had that on top of of having the olb bring a pass rush.

Instead of in a traditional 3-4 where you have 2 pass rushers in the base d he would have 4 or 5.

Last year in the base d we didnt have 1 player who could rush the qb.

 

[NVA CANE]

Main point is that Belichick said it requires big strong DL, which is something you're much more likely to have in the NFL than you are in college. There's no trades or waiver wire in college, so you have to spend three years developing those guys in the weight room. So you have no margin for errors in recruiting because freshmans can't help you in this system. They're not big or strong enough. When you spend a couple years trying to develop guys like Brissett, Ivery, King, etc., and they bust, then you need to rely on new guys who aren't physically ready. This system leaves you almost no margin for error in recruiting.

Good stuff right here

Here's the thing. I agree it takes a few years to get the right kids and develop them to the point where you can run the system. For the most part that's what we've witnessed here the last few seasons. Frustrating for sure.
But when the system gets established and you get to the point where you can play the stronger and mature players and let the young players develop and learn until it's their turn to step up it could be a thing of beauty.

This is the issue right here, even with all the excuses and time put in, just by looking at these guys track record you can see they will sacrifice multiple seasons to have one decent season? Even you who have backed these guys arent even sure if they can get one dominate defense, nevertheless build a consistently strong defense year in year out. Randy even with his simplistic scheme which was figured out and abused from time to time put up consistent numbers even when the talent changed from year to year (I only bring him up because his scheme was the only other one we have run basically this century)

This is why I have issue with these guys, we have sacrificed 3 years of some bad defense, even historically bad and for what? Not even a guarantee of lockdown, you wont hear Golden or Dorito say, hey this year NO EXCUSES. We WILL get it done and if not its my fault. As much as I cannot stand the guy, go listen to Urban off of his 11-2 team, he held his defense accountable and said a mid 30s ranked defense is not accepted at OSU. MID 30s would be celebrated at UM! Golden would demand a raise for DORITO, sad man.

This is the problem right here. It works for a year but when your upperclassmen graduate or leave early there is a good chance you have to start over again, especially across the Dline. It explains why at UVA Goldens defense went from the 17th ranked defense to the 60+ ranked defense.

Its no way to run a defense and not something to hinge your career upon. Losing 3 years for one year of a top 20 defense just isn't worth it. Surprised golden hasn't figured that out yet.

 

[LuCane]

Personally, I still prefer an attacking, upfield defensive scheme regardless if it is based out of an odd or even front. The above article is interesting in that it highlights the advantage of safety coverages. I would assume this is mainly referring to split safety looks. However, typically in an even front a safety is used to balance out the numbers, particularly in the running game. All gaps are accounted for.

In the grand scheme of things I guess it ultimately boils down to whether or not Miami is able to consistently recruit an anchoring two gap defensive tackle or an athletic safety capable of playing down in the box while being equally effective in coverage. Based on the type of athletes we recruit in sFl, I think the odds are more favorable that we could find an Al Blades type of safety than a Vince Wilfork type of DT.

Let the upfront troops attack and reestablish the line of scrimmage while playing a lot of single high cover three and man 1. Just one mans opinion.

In addition, a lot of what BB relies on in this theory is that you'll be able to disguise, mix and take advantage through coverages. What you do up front allows for mixed looks from Safeties and ultimately becomes a big advantage if you have a sound foundation. So, 2 things:

1) Our foundation is not yet reliable because we haven't had a stud 2-gapper at NT and some would say it's difficult to sustain that pipeline in college. And,
2) Our current staff has not shown (admittedly, possibly because of #1) a willingness to mix looks consistently. Further, I'm yet to see any evidence of a proactive, innovative approach in anything on the field, so it's fair to wonder if it's even there waiting for when our foundation is sound.

Ultimately, we're playing a style that eventually provides a competitive advantage. But, have not been able to set the foundation to see the fruits of the advantage. What we will see is continued improvement because the players/talent will be better. My biggest fear isn't that we can't get back to, say, VTech level. I think that will happen pretty soon - with or without this staff. Rather, my biggest fear is that we won't return to a place where we win those 1-2 "really difficult" games. The ones where the other team has as much or more talent. Part of winning those games, at any level, is about approach/strategy/improvisation advantages. I hope we see more of it this year.

 

[killa1storm]

I like wade phillips 3-4 he bases his on speed and attacking.

In dallas and houston he didnt have a big 330+ nt. He had 3 techniques playing nt in raitliff and mitchell.

Dallas had 3 3technique dts on the line and in houston he had 1 3 technique and 2 4-3 sde in watt and smith.

He had that on top of of having the olb bring a pass rush.

Instead of in a traditional 3-4 where you have 2 pass rushers in the base d he would have 4 or 5.

Last year in the base d we didnt have 1 player who could rush the qb.

Yep that's true too. I'm a huge fan of the 1-gap 3-4 defenses.

Strong's 3-3-5 is based on a similar principle. He uses two traditional 4-3 type rush ends and a prototype 3-tech upfront and slants and stunts to create different matchups. It gives you all the advantages of the 3-4 as far as playing different fronts and disguising your pressures while still keeping athleticism on the field. As opposed to the traditional 3-4 where you basically have 3 defensive tackles upfront.

 

[Coach Macho]

He's 100% correct. There is nothing wrong with this style of defense if you have the correct personnel.

My issue with it is that it is not suited for the type of defensive linemen usually found in South Florida and therefore makes it much more difficult to run at Miami.

South Florida isn't (and hasn't ever been) a hotbed of pro-style QB's either. I don't necessarily think the style of local high school football is justification enough to change a system.

Your system/scheme should always reflect your region. If you're not gonna run an offense/defense that resembles your main recruiting base then you gotta search the country for the pieces you need.

Right now we're content with searching far and wide for QB's, TE's, OL and DL.

Not much we can do about the OL part. South FLA doesn't normally produce a ton of great O-linemen but we'd have to search the country for them no matter what scheme we ran on offense. However, we would make things easier on ourselves if we ran an offense and defense that's more tailored to South FLA skill players.

 

[Coach Macho]

The "traditional" 3-4 (i.e. 3 big *** D-linemen) is somewhat prehistoric IMO, particularly with the way offenses spread you out and throw the ball on any down. It's 1st or 2nd down and you have 3 massive, plodding, slow twitch guys playing D-line. Well where's your pass rush coming from if the offense lines up in spread and throws the ball? Your 1 outside linebacker?

I understand why a team would 2-gap. They wanna stay in 2-high and protect the vertical seams. However, there's now ways to protect those seams and play Cover-3.

Personally, I love the 3-4. It's symmetrical and easy to adjust on the fly. However, I prefer 1-gapping (slanting) out of it. Now you can use smaller, quicker D-linemen. You use speed, get penetration and still have the benefit of disguise. The gap responsibilities are identical to the 4-3.

 

[killa1storm]

The "traditional" 3-4 (i.e. 3 big *** D-linemen) is somewhat prehistoric IMO, particularly with the way offenses spread you out and throw the ball on any down. It's 1st or 2nd down and you have 3 massive, plodding, slow twitch guys playing D-line. Well where's your pass rush coming from if the offense lines up in spread and throws the ball? Your 1 outside linebacker?

I understand why a team would 2-gap. They wanna stay in 2-high and protect the vertical seams. However, there's now ways to protect those seams and play Cover-3.

Personally, I love the 3-4. It's symmetrical and easy to adjust on the fly. However, I prefer 1-gapping (slanting) out of it. Now you can use smaller, quicker D-linemen. You use speed, get penetration and still have the benefit of disguise. The gap responsibilities are identical to the 4-3.

If I remember correctly, that's what Grantham (now at Louisville) ran at UGA. Strong's 3-3-5 at UF had a similar concept. I'm a huge fan of it, you get the best of both worlds 1-gapping the 3-4 and slanting to create mismatches.

 

[TheMatador]

He's 100% correct. There is nothing wrong with this style of defense if you have the correct personnel.

My issue with it is that it is not suited for the type of defensive linemen usually found in South Florida and therefore makes it much more difficult to run at Miami.

Yeah, I know. Vince Wilfork never could have played this defense.

 

[TheMatador]

The "traditional" 3-4 (i.e. 3 big *** D-linemen) is somewhat prehistoric IMO, particularly with the way offenses spread you out and throw the ball on any down. It's 1st or 2nd down and you have 3 massive, plodding, slow twitch guys playing D-line. Well where's your pass rush coming from if the offense lines up in spread and throws the ball? Your 1 outside linebacker?

I understand why a team would 2-gap. They wanna stay in 2-high and protect the vertical seams. However, there's now ways to protect those seams and play Cover-3.

Personally, I love the 3-4. It's symmetrical and easy to adjust on the fly. However, I prefer 1-gapping (slanting) out of it. Now you can use smaller, quicker D-linemen. You use speed, get penetration and still have the benefit of disguise. The gap responsibilities are identical to the 4-3.

If I remember correctly, that's what Grantham (now at Louisville) ran at UGA. Strong's 3-3-5 at UF had a similar concept. I'm a huge fan of it, you get the best of both worlds 1-gapping the 3-4 and slanting to create mismatches.

Yes, when 3-4 first became all the rage in early 80's in the NFL you needed 3 DT's. That was the prehistoric 3-4 you're talking about.

 

[UMFarArcher]

He's 100% correct. There is nothing wrong with this style of defense if you have the correct personnel.

My issue with it is that it is not suited for the type of defensive linemen usually found in South Florida and therefore makes it much more difficult to run at Miami.

Yeah, I know. Vince Wilfork never could have played this defense.

Most of the great DT's couldn't either. Like fitting three square pegs in one round hole.