3-4 Defense

Addison Mode said:
dudeguyy said:
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/12/10/7359965/mike-riley-nebraska-head-coach-recruiting-strategy

Pretty good article describing both Riley's offensive and Banker's defensive philosophies in a simple way.

From that and other searching I've done, Banker ran a 4-3 in OSU most recently. Their Rivals site lists a 4-3 depth chart.

I'd be willing to bet a good amount Banker may use some 3-4 looks but will have a base 4-3 defense, at least for now. If we can see it's what our personnel are better suited for, he can as well. I like the idea of a... multiple defense *** throws up in mouth ***. It can confuse the offense, as opposed to our multiple offense, which mainly, well, confused the offense.
Click to expand...
Gee thanks. You made me throw up on my keyboard, dammit
Click to expand...
Dang. My bad!

I made somebody spit coffee out onto theirs the other day too. I guess I owe both of you one. I didn't budget this much for keyboards this year!
default_willy_nilly.gif


 
Agree with what is being said with the 4-3. Bottom line is that the scheme doesn't really matter. The people matter. Got the wrong people for your scheme... it won't work. The right ones... you look like a genius.

 
dudeguyy said:
Addison Mode said:
dudeguyy said:
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/12/10/7359965/mike-riley-nebraska-head-coach-recruiting-strategy

Pretty good article describing both Riley's offensive and Banker's defensive philosophies in a simple way.

From that and other searching I've done, Banker ran a 4-3 in OSU most recently. Their Rivals site lists a 4-3 depth chart.

I'd be willing to bet a good amount Banker may use some 3-4 looks but will have a base 4-3 defense, at least for now. If we can see it's what our personnel are better suited for, he can as well. I like the idea of a... multiple defense *** throws up in mouth ***. It can confuse the offense, as opposed to our multiple offense, which mainly, well, confused the offense.
Click to expand...
Gee thanks. You made me throw up on my keyboard, dammit
Click to expand...
Dang. My bad!
I made somebody spit coffee out onto theirs the other day too. I guess I owe both of you one. I didn't budget this much for keyboards this year!
default_willy_nilly.gif
Click to expand...
You just made me throw up on $1,000,000 cash that is now unusable

 
Multiple defense is way different than multiple offense.

I like the 34 scheme because of its versatility. Also like the idea of a 52 Monster, with Gerry being the Monster safety against teams like wisconsin

 
Coach Power'T said:
Multiple defense is way different than multiple offense.

I like the 34 scheme because of its versatility. Also like the idea of a 52 Monster, with Gerry being the Monster safety against teams like wisconsin
Click to expand...
5-2 would be nasty.

Can you imagine running that in 2016...

LEE Collins - Davis - VV - Davis - McMullen MOSELY

ROSE NEWBY

GERRY

ALEXANDER

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Abdullah the Butcher said:
There is less depth at linebacker than d line atm, I would say stick with 4-3 until you have the guys.
Click to expand...
i kind of figured that would be a reason to make the switch. Your front 3 are your NT and 2 DTs, making our rush ends OLBers needing only 2 traditional LBers. Looking at our DE's they'd fit that role fine. Moss, Gregory, etc.

 
As much as we got beat on the edge this season, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 3-4 or a 5-2 alignment, at least against certain opponents. We gave up too many plays where the DE got pinned inside and we were trying to set the edge with an undersized corner.

 
beanman said:
BIGREDinSD said:
Coach Power'T said:
Multiple defense is way different than multiple offense.

I like the 34 scheme because of its versatility. Also like the idea of a 52 Monster, with Gerry being the Monster safety against teams like wisconsin
Click to expand...
5-2 would be nasty.
Can you imagine running that in 2016...

LEE Collins - Davis - VV - Davis - McMullen MOSELY

ROSE NEWBY

GERRY

ALEXANDER
Click to expand...
Not sure if serious.
Click to expand...
I don't think it could be our base defense but, when lining up against a team like Wisconsin.

 
I have no problem with either a 4-3 or 3-4. Both can be successful and an attacking style of defense. My bigger question is, long term, which position is easier to recruit to? Is it easier to find good LBs or DTs? If it's easier to find good LBs, then find more of them and switch to a 3-4.

 
I think alot of people have misconceptions about the 3-4. The 4 linebackers wouldn't just come from the guys who are listed as a LB on this year's roster. The oustide linebackers in this defense are more like traditional DE's. Moss would probably be considered an outside LB in this defense, and if (huge if) Gregory comes back, it's possible he is the other OLB. That just leaves 2 traditional linebackers to play inside. Of course you can play with the personnel a little for running situations and put a true LB outside, but it's not like the 4 positions would only be filled by our current linebacking corps. If anything it would help get more d-lineman on the field.

Or maybe it's me who has the misconception and could be completely wrong about this.

 
People are taking the Davis's brother's quote way out of context here. Rivals has him quoted as saying that Riley has (and presumably will) run a 4-3, but that he is open to using a 3 man front at times as well. I highly doubt we'll be running a 3-4 for any significant time next year.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top