3-4 Defense

[ScottyIce]

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.

 

 

Okay, you are right, but there are certain limitations to who can play the OLB spot. I mean, not every current DE would be considered a fit at OLB in a 3-4.

 

Guys that would fit that role could be Moss and King.

McMullen and Gangwish wouldn't fit that role. At times you are also going to play some coverage, which probably doesn't play to the skillset of our current DE's.

[STL Husker]

 

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.

 

 

Okay, you are right, but there are certain limitations to who can play the OLB spot. I mean, not every current DE would be considered a fit at OLB in a 3-4.

 

Guys that would fit that role could be Moss and King.

McMullen and Gangwish wouldn't fit that role. At times you are also going to play some coverage, which probably doesn't play to the skillset of our current DE's.

 

I agree with you, but I think we actually have the players to run a successful 3-4 scheme. We have a mix of d-ends how have size like McMullen and speed like Moss and King. I also don't see this with much of a chance of happening, just saying you aren't going to see 4 true linebackers on the field at once.

[zoogs]

Yeah, I agree with STL, the real issue should come from who plays Nose. And how many of those types of players we have behind him.

 

The DEs that wouldn't be 3-4 OLBs would just remain as DEs. And would probably be better 3-4 DEs than 4-3 DEs. Randy Gregory should stay and show the world what he can do as an edge rusher.

[ScottyIce]

 

 

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.

 

 

Okay, you are right, but there are certain limitations to who can play the OLB spot. I mean, not every current DE would be considered a fit at OLB in a 3-4.

 

Guys that would fit that role could be Moss and King.

McMullen and Gangwish wouldn't fit that role. At times you are also going to play some coverage, which probably doesn't play to the skillset of our current DE's.

 

I agree with you, but I think we actually have the players to run a successful 3-4 scheme. We have a mix of d-ends how have size like McMullen and speed like Moss and King. I also don't see this with much of a chance of happening, just saying you aren't going to see 4 true linebackers on the field at once.

 

 

However, I do think Freedom and Neal could be OUTSTANDING fits at 3-4 OLB's.

[jsneb83]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bussey has the tools to be a stud and would be a stud in Rileys offense. However at the RB position we have a lot of young talent on our roster.

This I agree with. Bussey would be most talented back on our roster. We will be fine without him though. Wilbon was a plan b or c that decommitted from vandy right? Bussey is and has always been our only guy and we have fended off the wolves until right up until signing day. Too bad we couldn't hold the sec off any longer. Kid will be special.

Definitely was not plan B or C. Was a Rivals top170 guy who committed to Vandy VERY early (April of Jr. Year), then decommitted when Franklin left. We then held off PennSt and others for him.

Well he wasn't our number 1 guy. Our top guy was the back from Colorado that ended up at Arizona state who plays as a true freshmen. But back to bussey. Good to hear he still considers us.

Not saying it's the case but when Wilbon was committed to Vandy from April-Dec he was solid as could be...so not sure we saw him as a legit target. However we accepted Wilbon's commitment before Ballage decided so we musta been pretty happy with him. And lastly let's not act like Ballage did anything special as a true freshman, he ran for 112 yards all year.

He didn't do anything special but he is going to be. I don't know if you watched when he did get to play but he looked impressive. I think he is a better back at this stage than Newby is for our team, and definitely than WIlbon is for our team right now.

Lol, Wilbon didn't play...not sure I would begin to compare Ballage and Wilbon today.

By process of elimination, I think Ballage is better than Newby and Newby is better than Wilbon (or Wilbon would have played, if you believe that Bo always gave the kids a shot at competing to play) so Ballage is better than Wilbon... and this thread is getting out of control haha

Why would Wilbon have played? We had a possible Heisman rb in AA and two backups that had previous experience in the offense. You don't burn a redshirt on a freshman when you have someone like AA unless he's FAR better than the two backups. Not to mention the fact if you're Wilbon it's smarter to redshirt after coming of an injury like he did and the amount of carries he would've got would be minimal.

General philosophy with RB is if you are good you play early. It is the easiest position to move from HS to College and play. Not a steep learning curve and it allows you to use your God given ability. If you are a special back you don't come to college and redshirt unless you have an injury that prevents you from playing. Even when we had the Rex Burkhead we still got Ameer, Heard, and Green touches. Rex was a great back but if you have a hotshot Fresh come in you play him, bc most the times RB leave early for the draft if they are elite level. (Gotta keep that tread on the tires)

It's also ultimately the player's decision on if they want to redshirt or not. Adam Taylor probably could have played as a true frosh, but decided to redshirt instead. Some players don't want to waste a year for only 50-100 carries, so they take the year to get bigger, faster, and stronger, and learn the playbook more so they get more out of their first season than if they played sparingly as a true freshman.

[cg_8]

Where did this come from? My friend said something about 3-4 too. But I am not seeing it.

 

Looking at footage of OSU this last season and even in 2012, all I see is 4-3 base. I have not seen any 3-4 at all.

 

I don't like 3-4 myself. Mainly because our kids don't run it. They may have certain variations of 4-3 under with Gregory moving all over that has a look of 3-4, but as a base, I can't help but think of how players how are experts in certain techniques will just become lost when they can't run another way.

 

I always point to what happened with Warren Sapp. He was one of the best 3 technique guys to have played the game. But then he signed with the Raiders, which was running a 3-4. His 3 technique was useless there and he was crazy unproductive and almost useless.

 

That's what really worries me. With the switch, do guys like VV and Collins become unproductive because we just suddenly decided to switch the Base D on them? Or do we work them to their strengths?

 

My vote is work towards their strengths. Think of it this way, remember when we had an option based offense then some guy decided to take Joe Dailey and have him throw the ball 30+ times a game? This to me, is the defensive version of that. Well, maybe not, but it's somewhat similar. 4-3 gets my vote.

[Nebhawk]

3-4 or 4-3. It doesn't matter. If you have the talent to run either one, you can have success. The thing is in the Pac 12, your spread out and having 3-4 alignment is a good base.

 

Now, in saying that, who really knows what is best. I can see either working with some success , neither doing any good.

 

I do like the fact of having 4 linebackers. I like that against most offenses. It doesn't matter if you have shut down corners and good safeties.

 

If your secondary is solid, then your base is nothing but a base. Force teams to be one dimensional. This is what Alabama has done. Recruit great athletes for the secondary and above average linebackers and really good linemen. Easy to do when your getting the best of the best and even your second string is the best of the best.

[huskerhill]

Where did this come from? My friend said something about 3-4 too. But I am not seeing it.

 

Looking at footage of OSU this last season and even in 2012, all I see is 4-3 base. I have not seen any 3-4 at all.

 

I don't like 3-4 myself. Mainly because our kids don't run it. They may have certain variations of 4-3 under with Gregory moving all over that has a look of 3-4, but as a base, I can't help but think of how players how are experts in certain techniques will just become lost when they can't run another way.

 

I always point to what happened with Warren Sapp. He was one of the best 3 technique guys to have played the game. But then he signed with the Raiders, which was running a 3-4. His 3 technique was useless there and he was crazy unproductive and almost useless.

 

That's what really worries me. With the switch, do guys like VV and Collins become unproductive because we just suddenly decided to switch the Base D on them? Or do we work them to their strengths?

 

My vote is work towards their strengths. Think of it this way, remember when we had an option based offense then some guy decided to take Joe Dailey and have him throw the ball 30+ times a game? This to me, is the defensive version of that. Well, maybe not, but it's somewhat similar. 4-3 gets my vote.

I would think VV and Collins would have a lot of success in a 3-4

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

Personally I do not think MR will run a 3-4, he was just throwing football knowledge around when he said it.