Jump to content


3/4 vs Base D


TGHusker

Do you prefer the 3/4 D over the Base 4 down lineman D  

56 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I have yet to warm up to the 3/4 D. I have not been impressed by the results under SF or MR.   My understanding of the concept is that you need premium line backers to make it work - esp Outside LB who can be both great pass rushers and be able to cover RBs and TE on pass plays as needed.  My understanding is that the D line is to be stout enough to defend against the run but basic responsibility is to plug the holes so the LB can mop up either with pass rushing or stopping running plays.  It seems to me, that it takes more elite athletes to make it work.  We haven't had those elite guys on D as linebackers or great rush ends either.  So, maybe it is a good D if / when we have better athletes.  Correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

I would like us to discuss the merits of the 3/4 vs the base 4 DL defense.   

 

I believe only 3 teams in the Big 10 run the 3/4 D.  Is this the right D for the Big 10 - which is heavy on great runners and great OLs??

How is it better or worse for NU in our current situation vs a base D in your opinion. 

 

Vote in the poll and then elaborate why yes or no.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

I'd like Option C to be "It probably doesn't actually matter" and then I'd vote for that one.

 

I was vocal against the 3-4 initially but after seeing definitive results from the way Wisconsin runs theirs (with average to sort-of-good talent), I'm pretty convinced it doesn't really matter that much. The 3-4 should be the best scheme at limiting big chunk running plays if you align your guys correctly.

 

So in theory it's actually a decent scheme in the B1G.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

15 minutes ago, Undone said:

I'd like Option C to be "It probably doesn't actually matter" and then I'd vote for that one.

 

I was vocal against the 3-4 initially but after seeing definitive results from the way Wisconsin runs theirs (with average to sort-of-good talent), I'm pretty convinced it doesn't really matter that much. The 3-4 should be the best scheme at limiting big chunk running plays if you align your guys correctly.

 

So in theory it's actually a decent scheme in the B1G.

C is added plus a D

Link to comment

I prefer a 4-3 in the Big Ten where you need more big bodies on the line.  Stop the run first D!

 

If we had the LSU or Wisconsin’s DC I’d be ok with 3-4, they are very unpredictable.

 

The problem with Chinander’s 3-4 it’s very predictable and always has been.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, SFW said:

I prefer a 4-3 in the Big Ten where you need more big bodies on the line.  Stop the run first D!

 

If we had the LSU or Wisconsin’s DC I’d be ok with 3-4, they are very unpredictable.

 

The problem with Chinander’s 3-4 it’s very predictable and always has been.  

Chinander's actually is mostly predictable right now.  

 

That has mostly to do with not having better talent yet to run it and lack a familiarity caused by having 3 defensive coordinators in 4 years.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

This comment:

 

11 minutes ago, SFW said:

I prefer a 4-3 in the Big Ten where you need more big bodies on the line.

 

and this comment:

 

11 minutes ago, SFW said:

If we had the LSU or Wisconsin’s DC I’d be ok with 3-4, they are very unpredictable.

 

are kind of in contradiction to each other. That's because Wisconsin doesn't exactly have massive size on their D-line and they definitely don't have big size for their linebackers.

 

I do agree about creating more disguised packages, though. Strongly agree actually.

 

2 minutes ago, TheSker said:

Chinander's actually is mostly predictable right now.  

 

That has mostly to do with not having better talent yet to run it and lack a familiarity caused by having 3 defensive coordinators in 4 years.

 

This is the hopium that we pack into our pipe and smoke...but it isn't a for sure thing. It might just be that Chinander insists on keeping things overly simplistic, scheme-wise. Time and only time will tell there.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Undone said:

This comment:

 

 

and this comment:

 

 

are kind of in contradiction to each other. That's because Wisconsin doesn't exactly have massive size on their D-line and they definitely don't have big size for their linebackers.

 

I do agree about creating more disguised packages, though. Strongly agree actually.

 

 

This is the hopium that we pack into our pipe and smoke...but it isn't a for sure thing. It might just be that Chinander insists on keeping things overly simplistic, scheme-wise. Time and only time will tell there.

Hopium... that is great! :laughpound

Link to comment
2 hours ago, SFW said:

I prefer a 4-3 in the Big Ten where you need more big bodies on the line.  Stop the run first D!

 

If we had the LSU or Wisconsin’s DC I’d be ok with 3-4, they are very unpredictable.

 

The problem with Chinander’s 3-4 it’s very predictable and always has been.  

 

Summed up my thoughts entirely.

 

 

Link to comment

If you wanna run a 3-4 you better have good LBs. If you wanna run a 4-3 you better have a good D line. Our LBs were absolute garbage and I still feel that the Daniels and Davis Bros along with Stille were pretty solid for what we wanted to do and we still looked like crap. Therefore, our LBs have to improve a ton to be successful. 

 

That or find a new DC. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, BIG ERN said:

If you wanna run a 3-4 you better have good LBs. If you wanna run a 4-3 you better have a good D line. Our LBs were absolute garbage and I still feel that the Daniels and Davis Bros along with Stille were pretty solid for what we wanted to do and we still looked like crap. Therefore, our LBs have to improve a ton to be successful. 

 

That or find a new DC. 

I'm guessing some of the best defensive minds in the game would have looked bad at times this year with the available talent.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...